<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SunglassShop.com @ 10k Shines On Afternic&#8217;s Weekly Sales</title>
	<atom:link href="http://directnavigation.com/2010/02/sunglassshop-com-10k-shines-on-afternics-weekly-sales/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://directnavigation.com/2010/02/sunglassshop-com-10k-shines-on-afternics-weekly-sales/</link>
	<description>The Direct Navigation Industry Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Oct 2011 21:03:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rashid Mahmood</title>
		<link>http://directnavigation.com/2010/02/sunglassshop-com-10k-shines-on-afternics-weekly-sales/comment-page-1/#comment-792</link>
		<dc:creator>Rashid Mahmood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 09:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://directnavigation.com/?p=335#comment-792</guid>
		<description>ok, you win the argument about number os sales. I don’t have time to look at them all but I think there are non which sold more domains. But wouldn’t it have been better to just have one big auction instead of two auctions? Is an auction for low resrve domains really justified?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ok, you win the argument about number os sales. I don’t have time to look at them all but I think there are non which sold more domains. But wouldn’t it have been better to just have one big auction instead of two auctions? Is an auction for low resrve domains really justified?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

