A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about how Dan.com is holding up payouts on LTO deals. The payout change was vaguely alluded to in bullet point 9 on a product update posted the day the Afternic LTO was announced. No reason for the change was announced, and it is not at all clear what the actual payout policy is now.
Prior to the change, Dan.com would send a payout to the seller the business day after a buyer made an installment payment. After the change, some payouts have been delayed, and there does not appear to be consistency on payout timing. Worse yet, neither Dan nor GoDaddy have offered any explanation about why delaying payouts is necessary.
In my opinion, changing the payout timing for active LTO deals is unacceptable. Dan.com should return to issuing payouts to sellers the day after receiving the monthly installment payouts from buyers on deals that were created prior to the payout change. This is what sellers expected when they listed domain names for sale on Dan.com – and when the domain names were sold prior to the product update announcement last month.
Yesterday morning, I was notified that Dan.com received installment payment #7 from a buyer who is acquiring one of my company’s domain names on a 24 month lease to own deal. I was notified that the payout will not be sent to me for nearly 2 weeks, on August 21. As you can see from the chat screenshot below, past payments were issued one business day after the payment was made by the buyer.
On another LTO deal I have ongoing at Dan.com, the buyer’s payment was made this past Monday, and I received the payout on Tuesday. I find it peculiar that one LTO deal is going to take nearly two weeks to pay and another deal was paid out within one day. On a third LTO deal I have at Dan, an installment payment was made on August 1, and the payout is scheduled for August 14.
Not only are sellers now subject to payment delays, but there does not seem to be consistency with payout scheduling either.
I am fortunate to not have to rely on the cashflow from LTO deals to fund my business. If these deals were substantially higher, I may have planned to use the money to fund other deals or for business operations. Inconsistent payouts are not fair to sellers.
Changing the payout policy when sellers are already locked into deals is not acceptable. It is not fair for customers who listed their names with the LTO option under the expectation of prompt payouts. If there needs to be a payout policy change, it should be on new deals, so sellers have an understanding of the payout policy and can decide whether or not they still want to utilize the LTO option.