WHC | Re-auction (37.Viewing)

jaydub · 2026-04-23T18:14:59-0400

Thanks Frank…found it. Senior moment

MapleDots · 2026-04-23T18:15:28-0400

I think

@jamesp is working on this project if I'm not mistaking

rlm · 2026-04-23T18:34:20-0400

theinvestor said:
And this is the exact reason CIRA needs control for TBR. Making your own rules that are an advantage to the registrar only.

So when the domain doesn’t sell now we can start it back at $18 or do you get to hold the domain for another 2 years? This is no different than simply hoarding domains and waiting for their future value to increase in price.

Which is exactly something CIRA prohibits a registrar from doing.

I'll give WHC the benefit of the doubt for now that choosing this path was a bit naive on their part. Hopefully they realize that's not going to work.

It takes 2 people to drive up the price, and when one of them was fraudulent, the second bidder's price is no longer relevant. It's best to restart the auction at minimum bid prices and let the chips fall where they may.

MapleDots · 2026-04-23T18:37:32-0400

I have no intention of starting in on a 9k bid, if everyone feels the same what happens if the minimum 9k is not met?

Technically there is no bidder at 9k, I know I have bid on domains in the past I would not bid on today.

The only way to do this right is to let it sit a week to take pre bids and then have it run from whatever the pre bids were.

Stewie · 2026-04-23T19:04:11-0400

Would be nice to see the list so we could have a little input on this.
Putting out 5 domains to test is fine , but if the plan to auction five every week , seems like a cash grab,

Release 5 domains and one is an obvious premium, let me guess what happens..lol
Who decided which 5 domains , not alphabetical, Cira did a release of domains a few years ago , follow their lead and release them in bulk , maybe 3 packages . ..hard to say when we are in the dark how many domains we are talking about.

Details? How many domains?

How many bad bidders are we talking ? Same person? There is no way the bad bidder should be allowed in this auction. That’s an insult to everyone and makes the credibility of these auction shaky at best.

theinvestor · 2026-04-23T20:02:14-0400

It’s completely ridiculous. So pretty much they can bid up domains if they wanted to. No one is holding them accountable and then when it doesn’t fetch the price they want that’s a non-paying bidder. Cool thanks for letting us know. How transparent. They must take us all for idiots.

silentg · 2026-04-23T20:22:44-0400

Reminds me of expired domain auction from Dynadot where Rick was offered the domain after winning bidder didn’t pay. They didn’t remove all the bids from the deadbeat winner. they called it fair market price.

jaydub · 2026-04-23T20:37:25-0400

I remember when Siber had their re-auctions for unpaid auction domains they would start them at $35 if memory serves me correctly and it would be many domains not 5.

mikeyboy · 2026-04-23T21:21:39-0400

Yeah, no thanks. Start from $18.
Gonna transfer out all names

rlm · 2026-04-23T22:42:41-0400

Also note that I'm pretty sure that WHC has already accepted partial payment on deal.ca. I know the guy who bid on it (he used to be on the board here and you can probably guess who), and in his mind he intended on paying, but he was also intending to borrow or scam the money to pay for it. So he talked WHC into accepting payments, which he eventually defaulted on. So although I'm pretty sure they did accept some payments for it, I really have no idea if they collected $500 or $5000 already on this domain...

Spex · 2026-04-23T22:47:52-0400

Guess that answers my question about why a registrar is hanging onto a domain for 1.5 years.

But still, that's a lot of leeway for the buyer. They should have been given a week, maybe two, to pay up.

rlm · 2026-04-23T22:48:12-0400

CIRA should really have a policy that any domains not paid for must be re-auctioned within a certain reasonable time frame. The only reasonable excuse for waiting 18 months is that they were accepting payments this whole time and the guy just defaulted.

I remember catchdrop was doing that too and when I complained to Richard, he talked to catchdrop and catchdrop just said "oh right, those were domains we acquired testing out our TBR system" so Richard made them re-auction them, which I believe they did. They weren't great domains or anything, but to me it was the princple of making sure they didn't think that was OK.

MapleDots · 2026-04-23T23:28:34-0400

I think this will work itself out by itself, from the look of it none of us are bidding 9k so chances are it will just have to run again.

Would I have an issue bidding 9k? Not if it started at $18, or entered a proper pre-bid, but principle will keep me out at 9k start.

Eby · 2026-04-23T23:31:48-0400

Most of us will be out if it starts at 9K.

theinvestor · 2026-04-24T08:39:09-0400

The fact anyone is allowed to have a payment plan is nonsense. We all should have the same competitive advantage. If someone bids 9K but plans on paying over 2 years. Maybe someone else would have paid 15k if they could have done the same. If a domain is not paid for in my opinion in a reasonable time frame (less than a month) it needs to be re-auctioned right away. CIRA washes their hand of this entire process and then these registrars think they can do whatever they want.

theinvestor · 2026-04-24T08:43:54-0400

I don’t mean to attack WHC but this truly is baffling that they think this is okay. Similar to them transferring a domain I won in auction and paid for to another registrant without my consent. They clearly have very poor judgement.

MapleDots · 2026-04-24T08:46:36-0400

theinvestor said:
I don’t mean to attack WHC but this truly is baffling that they think this is okay. Similar to them transferring a domain I won in auction and paid for to another registrant without my consent. They clearly have very poor judgement.

Wow, I thought at auction was pretty well a done deal

MapleDots · 2026-04-24T08:48:40-0400

theinvestor said:
The fact anyone is allowed to have a payment plan is nonsense. We all should have the same competitive advantage. If someone bids 9K but plans on paying over 2 years. Maybe someone else would have paid 15k if they could have done the same. If a domain is not paid for in my opinion in a reasonable time frame (less than a month) it needs to be re-auctioned right away. CIRA washes their hand of this entire process and then these registrars think they can do whatever they want.

I'm sure there is a lot of that in the background and there should be a limit that bidders have if it shows an inability to pay. I won't bid if I don't have the cash available, that just makes sense.

If someone bids 9k and needs a payment plan maybe his max allowable bid should be closer to 5.

What does

@ms23 (grape) and

@bmetal do with non payers?

theinvestor · 2026-04-24T08:48:44-0400

It was a complicated process but it was during their Sibername merger. They were running auctions simultaneously. It doesn’t excuse them from the fact they think they can transfer a domain without someone’s consent as if they own it.

efalcon · 2026-04-24T09:03:18-0400

So, no, none of this is true. The reason we sat on these domains for as long as we did is that we had other priorities and this just wasn’t top of mind. There was 0$ made on these domains by WHC. Re-auctions is a minor initiative with only a handful of domains that we’ll probably rarely leverage and is in no way a mechanism to increase revenue from domains beyond what we assumed was fair lost revenue from those that didn’t pay.

Love the feedback we get here (eg. Start all re-auctions at 18$) but what’s up with all the shade? Borderline slander. Not impressed. If you’re curious, ask. We’re flexible and trying things out. Not looking to screw anyone or rig the system.

rlm said:
Also note that I'm pretty sure that WHC has already accepted partial payment on deal.ca. I know the guy who bid on it (he used to be on the board here and you can probably guess who), and in his mind he intended on paying, but he was also intending to borrow or scam the money to pay for it. So he talked WHC into accepting payments, which he eventually defaulted on. So although I'm pretty sure they did accept some payments for it, I really have no idea if they collected $500 or $5000 already on this domain...

rlm said:
CIRA should really have a policy that any domains not paid for must be re-auctioned within a certain reasonable time frame. The only reasonable excuse for waiting 18 months is that they were accepting payments this whole time and the guy just defaulted.

I remember catchdrop was doing that too and when I complained to Richard, he talked to catchdrop and catchdrop just said "oh right, those were domains we acquired testing out our TBR system" so Richard made them re-auction them, which I believe they did. They weren't great domains or anything, but to me it was the princple of making sure they didn't think that was OK.

WHC | Re-auction (37.Viewing)

BlueRare.com

MapleDots.ca

Bonfire.ca

MapleDots.ca

Member

DNC.ca

DomainRetail.com

BlueRare.com

Member

Bonfire.ca

Member

Bonfire.ca

MapleDots.ca

Verified Member

DNC.ca

DNC.ca

MapleDots.ca

MapleDots.ca

DNC.ca

WHC.ca

Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free for everyone.

Sponsors who contribute to keep dn.ca free.

Updated Premium Listings

Members who recently read this topic: 50