Archive for the ‘Domaining’ Category

Beware of fraudulent activity by

Hello and Assalamo Alaikum,

It’s been a great year overall and was hoping to end with something more good. However, I was hit with a bad news and that came from which was a good platform some years back but for quite some time they are losing their reputation exponentially.

A week back I received an email from Pheenix that an auction has started for domain and since I showed interest some time back (most probably the time of backordering when it was dropped in 2016) so I can participate in that auction which lasted for 3 days.

After winning the domain couple of days back I tried to transfer out and received authorization code. While transferring, the FOA (form of authorization) email was sent to some other email ID which looked suspicious. I went ahead and checked WHOIS and found the contact details are completely different than what I have set default at Pheenix.

So I decided to contact and explained the complete situation to Pheenix, they responded with “This domain is no longer managed by us.” That was strange response since I participated in auction, won and my card was charged. And they told the domain is no longer managed by us!

I replied with:

“But there was auction for this domain and I received email from you of winning the domain. Also your system deducted money from my credit card.

What’s wrong with you guys? If a domain is not owned by you then how can you auction and deduct money from my card and fails to deliver the domain???”

As expected it was another nonsensical response from their side:

Nothing is wrong with us.

The domain was mislisted. We have now reversed the charge so you should be good to go.
Please keep in mind that non com/net domain extensions may sometimes be mislisted in the Expired Domains marketplace and to double check whois to confirm that it is still with us.”

That’s utter nonsense from Pheenix by showing such irresponsible and unprofessional behavior. It’s run by a bunch of fraudsters. Now that’s not any domain buyer’s duty to check WHOIS before buying domain from auction platform like Pheenix because I’m not buying a domain from any individual where I need to check if the domain is stolen or not owned by the person I’m dealing with.

If that’s the case, we all need to keep checking WHOIS for all domains we regularly buy at GoDaddy Auctions, NameJet, DropCatch, etc.

Pheenix is no longer a trustworthy platform and I don’t plan to use them in future like I stopped using Flippa which is another dreadful platform… at least for me…

Well, there is nothing wrong or to blame the current owner of the domain. It’s the Pheenix who is responsible for causing this trouble and the least they could do was to admit their mistake but they have no regret of doing fraudulent activity.

Another UDRP win by with Howard Neu

Hello and Assalamo Alaikum,

It’s never a good thing for domain owner to get hit with UDRP.

With our last UDRP win for, this time it was on target. I already mentioned about the acquisition of this domain some time back. ALL credit goes to Howard Neu for saving another valuable domain.

Below is the abridged opinion of case #D2017-1679 at WIPO.INT.

“The Disputed Domain Name resolves to a pay-per-click (“PPC”) site, which mentions that the domain name “may be for sale”.  When the Complainant, via an unknown individual, inquired about a potential purchase of the Disputed Domain Name, the Respondent offered to sell the Disputed Domain Name in exchange of a six-digit figure amount.  An earlier request by the Complainant to purchase the Disputed Domain Name resulted in a five-digit figure amount offer.

B. Rights or Legitimate Interests

The second requirement the Complainant must prove is that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name.  The onus of proving this requirement, like each element, falls on the Complainant.  Given the difficulty in proving a negative, however, it is usually sufficient for a complainant to make out a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests.  If the complainant does establish a prima facie case, the burden of production shifts to the respondent.  See, e.g., WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.1.

The Complainant considers that the Respondent aims at selling the Disputed Domain Name and that the Respondent is only parking the Disputed Domain Name on a page comprising PPC links to websites that are in competition with the Complainant’s activities.  In response, the Respondent submits that the Disputed Domain Name refers to PPC advertising relating to the dictionary meaning of the words “print factory” only.  The Respondent considers such use a legitimate business use.

Under paragraph 4(c)(i) of the Policy, the Respondent will have rights to or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name if, before any notice of the dispute, he had used or made demonstrable preparations to use the Disputed Domain Name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.

Using a domain name to host a page comprising PPC links surely constitutes a very minimal use of the domain name.  Nevertheless, panels have recognised that “the use of a domain name to host a page comprising PPC links would be permissible – and therefore consistent with respondent rights or legitimate interests under the UDRP – where the domain name consists of an actual dictionary word(s) or phrase and is used to host PPC links genuinely related to the dictionary meaning of the word(s) or phrase comprising the domain name, and not to trade off the complainant’s (or its competitor’s) trademark.” (See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.9).

In the case at hand, there is no evidence that the Respondent is trying to trade off the Complainant’s (or any of its competitors’) trademarks.  The PPC links on the website associated with the Disputed Domain Name appear to be genuinely related to the dictionary meaning of the words comprising the Disputed Domain Name.  The PPC links are not related to the goods for which the Complainant has registered trademark rights.

The Panel therefore concludes that, on the basis of the evidentiary record in this proceeding, the Complainant has failed to prove the absence of rights or legitimate interests on the part of the Respondent.

Accordingly, the Complainant has not established the second requirement under the Policy and the Complaint must be dismissed.

C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

In view of the Panel’s findings under the second limb of the Policy, there is no need for the Panel to consider the third requirement under the Policy as all three requirements of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy must be met for a complainant to prevail.

In any event, the Panel considers that the Complainant has not shown, on the balance of probabilities, that the Disputed Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith.  Surely, the Disputed Domain Name appears to be registered primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name for valuable consideration in excess of the Respondent’s documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name.  However, no evidence suggests that the Respondent had the Complainant or its trademark in mind when registering the Disputed Domain Name.  The value the Respondent attaches to the Disputed Domain Name appears to be inspired by the dictionary meaning of the Disputed Domain Name, and not by the identity of parties that may be interested in acquiring the Disputed Domain Name.”

The Panel consisted of Flip Jan Claude Petillion, Presiding Panelist, Gregor Vos and Tony Willoughby.

Once again I thank Mr. Howard Neu for representing and defending the domain.

I wanted to convey a message to all people around the world, I will try my best to defend my properties and won’t let them go easily.

Any feedback is welcome.

Another new exciting feature at Uniregistry Market

Hello and Assalamo Alaikum,

I have been using Uniregistry (formerly DomainNameSales) for years and it’s great to see new features and improvements are made every now and then.

Recently I noticed live chat feature at Uniregistry Market. Currently it’s available at Uniregistry Market, Transfer, and Register search pages only. All pages require you to be logged in. You will see a small chat logo at the bottom right. as shown in snapshot below:

Click on that and you will find several support team members you can start chat with:



I had a pleasant chat with Jordan who seems to be Manager of Customer Support team based in United Kingdom. Their support hours are 8am-5pm GMT UK. According to him, clients may have their brief issues get resolved. Nothing should carry over. Any issue requiring a longer wait will be moved to a ticket.

You may also attach any file/snapshot related to your concerned issues. Clients will also be able to rating chats once they are closed.

Feel free to comment and give your feedback.


Tip to check unlimited FREE valuation from

Hello and Assalamo Alaikum,

I’m never a fan of using ANY automated valuation site including Estibot. But since many domainers especially newbies check this site for valuation and as we all know Estibot allows 1 free appraisal per IP in 24 hours.

Anyone using Uniregistry Market can utilize this feature but is limited to inquiries you receives. At least, that’s what I’m aware of and not sure if there is any way you can check for all the domains which are under your account at Uniregistry Market.

Simply login to your Unregistry Market account, Inbox, open any inquiry. Click on the “Settings icon” as marked in snapshot below.


You will see a different options in that box which shows several options. One of which is EstiBot valuation for your domain.

I highly don’t recommend anyone to depend on ANY valuation tools including Estibot which in my opinion is total worthless. But my purpose of sharing is to check for fun in case you have some extra time to see what this crappy tool valuates your domain 😀

Feel free to share your feedback and if someone knows a way to get free valuation for all domains in your Uniregistry account, kindly share in comment section for others to know.

Several more domain purchases of 2017

Hello and Asslamo Alaikum,

I think the last acquisitions post was made in February 2017 so I thought it’s the time to share once again.

Beginning of this month, I now have hit the mark of 1,500 domains in my portfolio.

Usually I share only few domain purchases and try to post those which gives clear idea of what type of names I acquire and this may help others in understanding. This doesn’t mean one should start buying similar type of names and you should be doing your own research as everyone has their own budget, knowledge, skills, ideas and luck, etc.

I have had a little success in selling .CO domains for profit and I always like to buy 1 word .CO names and 3L .CO which are good to invest IMO. So this year I got several of them which are listed below.

Renovations.CO, Craze.CO, Courtney.CO, Lynch.CO – Got 1 word .CO names which I think are good to have.

COK.CO, NOI.CO, LUS.CO, LOR.CO, TAY.CO, TEZ.CO, MDN.CO – These type of combinations are selling for low-mid 4 figures range and I think they are good to invest. But prepare to hold them for long time as they are not 3L .coms 😉 – Online food/grocery store. – Adventure/sports loving, an aggressive and positive tagline. – I love to invest in such highly brandable domain which can be used for multipurpose. You just name it. Thanks to Jamie Zoch (DotWeekly) for helping in acquiring this domain. – Again a domain which can be used for many different niches and not only a water supply/bottle, aqua related company. And again thanks to Jamie for the same above reason 🙂 – Crypto related company.,, – Long shot names. – Sensible group names always does well. Although singular would have been better.,,, – Can’t live without buying 4L .com domains even though I know they are slow to sell 😀

Feel free to comment and/or share your recent acquisitions.