| 2:46 am on Mar 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Why do they refuse to use escrow.com?
If it's cost, offer to pay the entire escrow fee.
Otherwise, I'd be suspicious of the seller's motives.
| 6:58 pm on Mar 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Somehow they had a bad experience. Pretty strange. People here love the Escrow.com service.
I guess we will use another service.
[edited by: Webwork at 10:00 am (utc) on Mar. 12, 2006]
| 11:04 am on Mar 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Sedo offers escrow for domains.
[edited by: Webwork at 1:47 pm (utc) on Mar. 17, 2006]
[edit reason] Charter [webmasterworld.com] [/edit]
| 5:20 pm on Mar 19, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Becareful. Theres lot of fraud going on in the nascent domain industry now. I have read lot of horror stories on many domain forums.
| 4:06 pm on Mar 20, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Sedo, Afternic, Moniker all provide escrow services. There are probably others.
| 5:42 am on Mar 21, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Escrow.com is not foolproof. They do not take delivery of the domain as with a true escrow service like Sedo or Moniker.
Those two receive both the domain and the funds in their account before distributing them.
I believe escrow.com relies on detecting a Whois change which is not infallible.
| 4:49 pm on Mar 21, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I believe escrow.com relies on detecting a Whois change which is not infallible. |
Can you give a scenario where that method would be fallible? (AND where having the escrow agent take possession of the domain would be an advantage?)
While they DO check WHOIS, the funds aren't released until the buyer affirms that they have taken possession of the domain. Plus, there may be other conditions that have to be met, depending on the specifics of the agreement. (For example, I sold a domain with software source code. The buyer had to affirm that he had received the source code and was satisfied that it was what was called for in the agreement.)
An analogy would be checking shipper tracking numbers, but still requiring the buyer to assert that they received the package in good condition.