btw, I just don’t get why there is still a “window” that we have to put a “backorder” . Just open it up and auction the domains as openly as possible where anyone can bid at any point during the auction.

For all their faults and previous problems, I have to commend godaddy auctions. They are the only ones I really know where I can walk in at the last minute and still bid on a domain . . . all the other ones I have to be watching days in advance to know what’s what and when a name is going. . stupid imho and for the auction houses they are likely losing money on these.

Oh yeah and to the best of my knowledge godaddy gives bidder #2 a chance to buy the name at their last bid when someone pulls out. I’ve gotten a couple this way. Never seen any GD names reauctioned. Does snap still reauction names or just keep them for themselves ?

Why is it so hard to comprehend that you null and void ALL bids entered by the winning bidder.

Who cares about bidder 3 getting a fair shot? Bidder 3 had a fair shot while the auction was running but bidder 2 beat their high bid. Then Bidder 1 got into it with Bidder 2. You go back to the point bidder 2 bested all other bidders.

This is the fair set up. But the auctioneers don’t like it because they loose money. In some cases, big money. Lets say the non-paying bidder came in at $3,500 but ran the auction up to $6,000 against bidder 2. The auction house will say that it should be awarded to bidder 2 at $5,900.

BULL!

ALL bids entered by bidder one are voided going back to when bidder one entered. Thus, the auction’s LEGITIMATE BIDDERS and BIDS are the deciding factor.

The auction house looks at this as loosing money. They lose nothing by keeping the legitimate bidders happy and coming back.

The auctioneers lose when they start creating an air of suspicion.

Only those who made the decision to bid in the original auction should be allowed to bid on any subsequent re-auction/s.

If you didn’t make the commitment to join in the first time around, why should you be able to join in in (the) later round/s?

I’m not sure I have strong opinion either way. That’s why I suggested that the auction be marketed with the same publicity as the first one.

So, I guess anyone who puts in a back order. There can be no favoritism to anyone that’s why non-paying bidders need to be banned from all future auctions since they cause so much of a hassle.

Who should be able to participate in the re-auction only those who were in the first auction or everyone in the world?

Re-auction the domain with as much notice and publicity as it was originally given.

1. The auction house cannot simply give it to the under bidder because ALL of the non-paying high bidder’s bid are invalid.

2. So, take it down to the second under bidder and give it to the underbidder at one bid increment above the second under bidder? WRONG. That second under bidder might have bid a few more increments higher if he/she was not over bid.

Say the domain goes like this:

#1 bidder (non-paying winner) $3k
#2 under bidder $2900
#1 $2800
#2 $2700
#1 $2600
#2 $2500
#3 second under bidder $2400

Maybe #3 would have bid to $3k but saw #1 was at $3k so he/she didn’t bid. So, why should #2 get the domain for $2500 and #3 get shut out of his/her chance to own the domain? VERY unfair to the second under bidder.

3. The domain auction needs to be re-auctioned with plenty of advance notice and publicity that brought the original bidders. Anything less would be unfair to all parties except for the #2 under bidder.

Is this how Namejet plans to re-auction toxic.com?

Secondly, and I’m sure part of the first request… removing the domains when renewed and not leaving them on the site “for a couple days” as bait.