flip.uk - .UK Domain Auctions and Marketplace

[ukbackorder]

Maybe put a filter option not to show reserve auctions which can be saved to the account?

 

[super-whois]

I don't think a reserve would normally be an issue, it only becomes problematic when the reserve is unrealistic, or is aimed at the end user, rather than a trade sale.

I think unrealistic reserves devalue the platform, and I'm sure one site used to charge 5% to list a name with a reserve, as a way to discourage its use. Maybe reserves should be capped, or instead of a reserve, the name is simply listed with a higher starting bid.

 

[DJ]

Maybe put a filter option not to show reserve auctions which can be saved to the account?

I'm not sure I fully agree with this as this will effect genuine sellers who set modest and realistic reserves.

The issue is that there are a few users that are constantly flooding the auctions with unrealistic reserve prices. I would rather see a cap implemented on the amount of auctions you can run with a reserve price (a maximum of 1 or 2) as well as a restriction to a name being relisted within a timeframe unless it is reduced. I would also welcome a cap to how many active auctions a user can have running at anyone time, regardless of reserve. The amount could be increased by the amount of feedback a user has. Or could be increased as soon as an active auction will sell (i.e. it has been bid on and the reserve has been met).

I am sorry to be negative Colin as I know you are working hard and the platform and concept has the potential to be great, but I feel the site has stagnated over the last couple of months and any early momentum you had, is sadly starting to fade away - and I truly believe this is a result of 2 or 3 users abusing the fact you are offering a free platform without any barriers to entry. Maybe the data would prove me wrong but this is just my opinion.

 

[ukbackorder]

How many domains with reserve do you see selling at any auction platforms? A very small percentage. There is a reason for that - people with reserves usually have unrealistically high expectations. A filter would give people the option not to have to wade through any of them. People don't have to use it.

 

[DJ]

How many domains with reserve do you see selling at any auction platforms? A very small percentage. There is a reason for that - people with reserves usually have unrealistically high expectations. A filter would give people the option not to have to wade through any of them. People don't have to use it.

In general I agree and this is why I have suggested scrapping reserves in the past and allowing users to set the starting price.

I sold floorplans.co.uk on flip a few months back which had a modest reserve and knit.uk also sold recently which had a reserve also. So some users will use it as a genuine failsafe, but most, I agree, will have unrealistic expectations.

 

[lazarus]

@Pedigree In regards to stats... Traffic wise, sales and new users have never been better. And because of all the new users, getting top dollar for your domain is at parity. Definitely not stagnant or losing traction As you can see the current running Showcase auctions is on par with any other. The gap has been closed and I am very pleased with the pace at which it has done so.

BTW Congrats to @super-whois with 2 cracking auction sales this week

There will be restrictions in regards to rotating domains, this makes sense. At the same time, the last thing I want to do is over police / restrict it and set up barriers, but instead get the algo just right. As discussed in another thread, let the users decide what belongs in the Showcase section. And anyone that does not have time to go through the whole list, just keep to the Showcase section.

Personally, I am not a fan of reserves but some are so we have to have them. I am not convinced that having a user defined starting price is a good idea. I think this has more negatives than positives. But I wont be the first time I have been wrong
Does anyone else have any thoughts about it?

But back to the reserve indicator. I have now implemented it as a trial to see how it goes. I think, its a win - win but we will see.

Cheers, Colin

 

[bluerock]

There are several what I would call "not worth reg fee" names on there with reserves in the £xxxx category. It just dilutes from the positive elements of the site.
I've only used a reserve once and it was a realistic reserve which was met. Its too easy to list crap/misspell names at £xxxx in the hope some idiot will come along.

 

[super-whois]

There are several what I would call "not worth reg fee" names on there with reserves in the £xxxx category.

I think they might have more luck using their investment to register the output of the Cipher Block Chaining.

 

[DJ]

There are several what I would call "not worth reg fee" names on there with reserves in the £xxxx category. It just dilutes from the positive elements of the site.
I've only used a reserve once and it was a realistic reserve which was met. Its too easy to list crap/misspell names at £xxxx in the hope some idiot will come along.

I agree, the reserve indicator is a good idea but it just highlights and proves what I have been saying for sometime.

One user currently has 28 listings all with reserves and has maintained this amount on the platform for months. I doubt they have actually sold anything as they have no feedback from buyers.

Another user has 29 auctions, many without reserve to be fair, but a lot are as you described. They have also maintained this level of activity for months but their feedback would suggest they have only sold 3 names.

There are currently 81 active auctions so the 2 users above account for 70% of them.

My opinion still is that the amount of auctions that a user can have running at anyone time should be limited. This number could increase once the seller has received a certain amount of feedback. There is a marketplace that users can use to list their names with a buy it now price, so users should set buy it now prices for there names instead of flooding the auctions.

Anyway, I don't want to sound like a broken record so this will be the last I will say on the matter.

 

[lazarus]

Hi All,

Just wanted to run this past you all.

In order to drastically reduce the amount of low quality reserved auctions how does this sound?

*5-9
Please let me know your thoughts, Cheers, Colin

Edit: Maybe a member with 0 feedback should be allowed to have at least one reserve auction?

 

[webber]

The principle is great!
The maximum Reserve Auctions you can list could start at 1, like you suggested, so that this is not a barrier in using the full functionality of the website but rather a temporary limit.
I would also think similarly tiered limits can be applied to how many Auctions you can have with or without Reserve.

 

[lazarus]

I would also think similarly tiered limits can be applied to how many Auctions you can have with or without Reserve.

Yea. Getting the numbers right, is tricky. I will have a think about including numbers for the "total number of auctions" allowed and post up a table soon.

Cheers

 

[DJ]

I would suggest this

1-4 ...... 1 Reserve 5 Overall
5-9 ...... 2 Reserve 10 Overall
10-14 ...... 3 Reserve 15 Overall
15-20 ...... 5 Reserve 20 Overall
20+ ...... 10 Reserve 25 Overall

Just my opinion but I feel the overall should be limited also. It might encourage people to run shorter auctions which will create a higher turnover.

 

[lazarus]

I would suggest this

1-4 ...... 1 Reserve 5 Overall
5-9 ...... 2 Reserve 10 Overall
10-14 ...... 3 Reserve 15 Overall
15-20 ...... 5 Reserve 20 Overall
20+ ...... 10 Reserve 25 Overall

Just my opinion but I feel the overall should be limited also. It might encourage people to run shorter auctions which will create a higher turnover.

Yep that look like a good and fair balance. I will get busy implementing it
Thanks everyone for the input!

Cheers, Colin

 

[bluerock]

Hi All,

Just wanted to run this past you all.

In order to drastically reduce the amount of low quality reserved auctions how does this sound?

View attachment 3224

*5-9
Please let me know your thoughts, Cheers, Colin

Edit: Maybe a member with 0 feedback should be allowed to have at least one reserve auction?

The principle is good but while I've sold a few names on there not everyone completes the feedback. I only have 3 feedback comments left as an example. Maybe completed sales instead of a feedback score? Just a thought.

EDIT: The two posts above look good and should work fine

 

[super-whois]

I will have a think about including numbers for the "total number of auctions" allowed and post up a table soon.

I would suggest a limit based on number of auctions without bids, rather than including auctions with bids. Although there is a danger some might try to play the system with shill bidding, but at least there's no incentive to avoid a £5 listing fee.

 

[lazarus]

Hi all, I have implemented the auction caps. No doubt we will now see less rotated reserve auctions.

 

[lazarus]

I would suggest a limit based on number of auctions without bids, rather than including auctions with bids. Although there is a danger some might try to play the system with shill bidding, but at least there's no incentive to avoid a £5 listing fee.

That's a good idea, We'll see how it goes. I think for most users, the capping is generous. It's only the odd few that it will impact on.

 

[bluerock]

It seems I'm in the odd few category.
The problem I highlighted is the case. That the quota only goes off feedback, if no feedback is left the auction limits do not increase.

To highlight this I have 9 completed sales and only 3 feedback responses. There is no incentive for buyers to complete feedback.

 

[DJ]

It seems I'm in the odd few category.
The problem I highlighted is the case. That the quota only goes off feedback, if no feedback is left the auction limits do not increase.

To highlight this I have 9 completed sales and only 3 feedback responses. There is no incentive for anyone to complete feedback.

People generally do if you send them a message to ask them to.