Rick Schwartz is not pleased with how Dynadot handles non paying auction winners

Rick Schwartz has gone public on LinkedIn about an auction issue he had with Dynadot. Many in the business including myself have written about this before. How does a marketplace handle non paying bidders? Some reauction, others offer it to the second highest bidder but leave the fraudulent winning bidder’s bids. A few will remove all their bids. Rick was in the auction for CoinBook.com and here is what he has to say.

NO JOKE! Today I’m calling out @Dynadot because our industry can’t survive policies that reward abuse and destroy trust.

Here’s what happened in the Coinbook.com auction:

• The highest bidder defaulted and refused to pay.

• Under Dynadot’s current policy, that bidder’s phantom bids still remain in the sale price I’m expected to pay while Dynadot keeps the defaulter’s forfeited deposit.

• That structure punishes legitimate bidders and creates the appearance of a conflict of interest, where the platform profits whether the fraudster pays or not. That isn’t an honest mistake. It’s a broken system that makes honest bidders the victims and turns a trusted marketplace into a playground for co-conspirators and enablers of manipulation.

Imagine a real-estate auction where a house is bid to $3.5 million and it’s later discovered every bid above $1.5 million was fake. Would any reputable auctioneer still demand the next buyer pay $3.5 million?

Of course not. They’d void the fake bids and protect the buyer. Dynadot’s policy does the opposite. It rewards the faker, collects the deposit, and expects the real bidder to pay the inflated and BOGUS price. That’s not an auction that’s a built-in conflict of interest at the very minimum.

Dynadot benefits on both sides and the domain investor gets financially raped. And since bidders are anonymous, there’s no accountability whatsoever. No transparency whatsoever. I’m asking for three simple, fair actions:

1️⃣ Revert the sale to the last legitimate bid before the defaulting bidder entered the picture.

2️⃣ Remove any financial benefit to the defaulter no platform should profit from deception.

3️⃣ Publicly commit to rewriting this policy so no one ever has to bid against ghosts again. I’ve spent three decades building this industry teaching, investing, defending, and helping it grow. I’m not out to destroy anyone, but I won’t stand by while ethics are treated like optional settings.

If Dynadot fixes this transparently, I’ll say so publicly. If they ignore it, I’ll publish every detail VERY SOON and let the marketplace deliver its verdict.

The marketplace is the jury. Auctions are about reputation and trust. Instead Trust is the verdict. Dynadot should take this seriously.

This isn’t a PR hiccup or a minor policy issue, it’s an existential threat to their auction business. When the marketplace loses trust, volume collapses. When transparency dies, bidders disappear.

If Dynadot doesn’t correct this NOW their entire auction operation could implode under its own weight. I’ve seen companies rise and fall over trust. This could be the moment that decides which side Dynadot ends up on.

? Rick Schwartz DomainKing®