@
http://domainbinge.com/archives/strategies/generic-domains-identify-your-niche-and-own-it/ ,
My Dear Sir DoMainBinge said : :
>> The race is producing sale amounts
>> that can be quite discouraging
>> for people trying to “break in” to the domain name industry.
>> Sure
>> I can fork out a couple grand for a domain,
>> but can I muster up
>> hundreds of thousands of dollars on a speculative play?
>> Do I want to?””’
my response o'[of] 3-penny : :::::
2 certain extent , oyes ,
but ,
your property 4resale again must come up w/ some decent developement ,
4example((^--;for-example;--^)) : :
shopping.com or those exemplified @
http://gdoms.blogspot.com/search/label/easy4resale[[theProperty+decentDevelopement]]````they%20admit%20to%20selling%20too%20soon
i.e.
ye better 2b[to-be] your bought property's developper
just as
those property developpers in the real world ,
who buy up a prime land or house e.t.c.
2dev4resellOrLease[to-develop-for-resell-or-lease] , e.t.c.,
u-c[you-see] ,
just how [[too-much]]
SUCcessfully((;=really;))
successful +
successfull
those property developpers in the real world
have been being
,;–^),
4example((^--;for-example;--^)) : :
http://gdoms.blogspot.com/2007/06/httpwww.html
““ they admit to selling too soon.””
““ they admit to selling too soon.””
any proper[good] property ,
indeed
indeep ,
any thing does not guarantee any success ,
any thing does not-guarantee any success ,
but ,
a proper[good] property may b[be] easy4resale
if
the formula ’s : :::::
the property + decent developement
the property + decent developement
as witnessed
by REALty WORLD
Thursday 28 June 2007
flicker.com piggybacks on any success o' flickr.com e.t.c. , The Advantage Of Owning The Generic Domains .com
http://www.conceptualist.com/
http://www.conceptualist.com/?p=160
[[.....]]
The Advantage Of Owning Generic Domains
Published May 15, 2007 in Domain Names.
No one will argue there’s already a shortage with type-in generic domains.
Now take it 10 years forward, or 20.
A new startup is founded and its founders are looking for a domain name for their business.
Let’s say, just a random example ( ) their concept is to create a
funeral homes directory, but of course,
Funeralhomes.com is registered many years ago.
What are they to do? They go and find a different domain of course, say
Fuenralhomes-newname.com.
They put their site together,
hypothetically speaking,
a better site then[[than]] the current leader Funeralhomes.com, and start to market.
They happen to be experts and do extremely good job marketing, and achieve the unimaginable
– they become market leader.
What is happening with the traffic to funeralhomes.com
though?
users
who do not remember the complicated/creative
name of the startup
[[[[[[[[[ Fuenralhomes-newname.com e.t.c. ]]]]]]]]]
tend to remember the concept behind the name
(especially if they heard of the generic before),
and they type funeralhomes.com.
Traffic leakage goes up at funeralhomes.com
thanks to the new startup. Even if funeralhomes.com goes out of business traffic will still be there
thanks to the new startup.
the more traffic the startup command,
the more leakage.
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor2w notes : :::::
that's ex-actly the tragedy happenning 4[for]
flicker.com v. flickr.com
[[[[ o k o k , not so much a tragedy 4[for] flicker.com ]]]]]
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
How’s that for motivation??
The cost gets higher as some users, even though acquired at great cost, “get lost”
This by the way is happening today every single second of the day and most companies,
I would guess over 99.999% of them, don’t realize it.
This is the long term power of generics.
It isn’t just about today,
It is also about those startups 20 years from now.
Whatever they gonna do, and those who succeed,
will (fortunately to generic domain owners) keep leaking traffic to generic domains.
5 Responses to “The Advantage Of Owning Generic Domains”
Feed for this Entry Trackback Address
[[.....]]
5 John
Jun 11th, 2007 at 9:05 am
Recently,
I finally ‘realized’ the power of generic domains while working on an Adwords campaign for a small business.
Either I pay Google to send traffic based on keyword searches to this particular business,
or I buy all the generic domain names around this business
and drive that type in traffic to this website.
Generics alone won’t solve the traffic issue, I’d still need to advertise.
But acquiring good generics would be a one time high-ish cost if they are already registered
(then there’s just annual renewals) for x amount of traffic.
Google Adwords, on the other hand, wants to be fed according to clicks or impressions.
And I could easily pay 600 dollars a month on Adwords.
That makes
spending 5 - 10k for good generics look cheap.
I wonder if Google will begin to notice if advertisers begin picking up generics and forwarding that traffic to their sites. And
I wonder if Google will step in and start sucking up domain names.
They sure have the computing power to do so.
—-ANSWER—-
Congratulations!I don’t think it is meaningful loss to big search engines that people have some direct traffic such as from domain names, as businesses need to expand, as you indicated, even with a good generic you are still going to buy traffic from the engines.As far as Google/Yahoo/MSN getting into the game and acquiring domains, I believe that is the end goal (wishful thinking anyways) of med size companies such as Marchex, NameMedia, ,Demand Media, Ireit.
Leave a Reply
Welcome back 2w.com (Change)
[[.....]]
http://www.conceptualist.com/?p=160
[[.....]]
The Advantage Of Owning Generic Domains
Published May 15, 2007 in Domain Names.
No one will argue there’s already a shortage with type-in generic domains.
Now take it 10 years forward, or 20.
A new startup is founded and its founders are looking for a domain name for their business.
Let’s say, just a random example ( ) their concept is to create a
funeral homes directory, but of course,
Funeralhomes.com is registered many years ago.
What are they to do? They go and find a different domain of course, say
Fuenralhomes-newname.com.
They put their site together,
hypothetically speaking,
a better site then[[than]] the current leader Funeralhomes.com, and start to market.
They happen to be experts and do extremely good job marketing, and achieve the unimaginable
– they become market leader.
What is happening with the traffic to funeralhomes.com
though?
users
who do not remember the complicated/creative
name of the startup
[[[[[[[[[ Fuenralhomes-newname.com e.t.c. ]]]]]]]]]
tend to remember the concept behind the name
(especially if they heard of the generic before),
and they type funeralhomes.com.
Traffic leakage goes up at funeralhomes.com
thanks to the new startup. Even if funeralhomes.com goes out of business traffic will still be there
thanks to the new startup.
the more traffic the startup command,
the more leakage.
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor2w notes : :::::
that's ex-actly the tragedy happenning 4[for]
flicker.com v. flickr.com
[[[[ o k o k , not so much a tragedy 4[for] flicker.com ]]]]]
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
How’s that for motivation??
The cost gets higher as some users, even though acquired at great cost, “get lost”
This by the way is happening today every single second of the day and most companies,
I would guess over 99.999% of them, don’t realize it.
This is the long term power of generics.
It isn’t just about today,
It is also about those startups 20 years from now.
Whatever they gonna do, and those who succeed,
will (fortunately to generic domain owners) keep leaking traffic to generic domains.
5 Responses to “The Advantage Of Owning Generic Domains”
Feed for this Entry Trackback Address
[[.....]]
5 John
Jun 11th, 2007 at 9:05 am
Recently,
I finally ‘realized’ the power of generic domains while working on an Adwords campaign for a small business.
Either I pay Google to send traffic based on keyword searches to this particular business,
or I buy all the generic domain names around this business
and drive that type in traffic to this website.
Generics alone won’t solve the traffic issue, I’d still need to advertise.
But acquiring good generics would be a one time high-ish cost if they are already registered
(then there’s just annual renewals) for x amount of traffic.
Google Adwords, on the other hand, wants to be fed according to clicks or impressions.
And I could easily pay 600 dollars a month on Adwords.
That makes
spending 5 - 10k for good generics look cheap.
I wonder if Google will begin to notice if advertisers begin picking up generics and forwarding that traffic to their sites. And
I wonder if Google will step in and start sucking up domain names.
They sure have the computing power to do so.
—-ANSWER—-
Congratulations!I don’t think it is meaningful loss to big search engines that people have some direct traffic such as from domain names, as businesses need to expand, as you indicated, even with a good generic you are still going to buy traffic from the engines.As far as Google/Yahoo/MSN getting into the game and acquiring domains, I believe that is the end goal (wishful thinking anyways) of med size companies such as Marchex, NameMedia, ,Demand Media, Ireit.
Leave a Reply
Welcome back 2w.com (Change)
[[.....]]
he meant an other site but could only remember the generic IDEA , _n_o_t_ the name of the site
http://frankschilling.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/05/the_power_of_co.html
[[.....]]
May 02, 2007
The Power of .COM branding
Sahar writes:
***FS*** This same scene plays out millions and millions of times each day.
It's hard to undo the trillion+ in collective branding that makes .com the global juggernaut it is.
Posted at 04:03 PM in Domain Names (Domains) Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2287856/18168276
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Power of .COM branding:
Comments
[[.....]]
[[.....]]
May 02, 2007
The Power of .COM branding
Sahar writes:
"This last weekend I took the family and went weightless with Zero Gravity
Corp (http://www.gozerog.com/ ), it was a
unique experience to say the least. Talking to another attendee about trip
ideas, I mentioned I want to go dolphin swimming. This other person, a wealthy
individual in the textile industry, said he went once and had a blast. I
asked him where can I find more information and he said "Just go to
Dolphins.com, they list a bunch of them including reviews".
So today, went online, checked out Dolphins.com, and it is a PPC page.
I'm sure he meant another site but he could only remember the generic version of
that site, the IDEA of what the site was about, rather then the site name
itself.
Even if your brand is a distinctive brand (ebay, Microsoft, Versign) )
this illustrates the power of owning the generic versions that represent your
industry."
***FS*** This same scene plays out millions and millions of times each day.
It's hard to undo the trillion+ in collective branding that makes .com the global juggernaut it is.
Posted at 04:03 PM in Domain Names (Domains) Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2287856/18168276
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Power of .COM branding:
Comments
[[.....]]
shopping.com sold for $600million BECAUSE they rebranded from dealtime.com which floundered for years BEFORE rebranding
http://frankschilling.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/06/scott-austin-do.html#comments
[[.....]]
June 27, 2007
"And You Want to Be My Latex Salesman..." - Scott Austin Doesn't Quite Get It
Dan sends link to Scott Austin's column...
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/names-now-elusive-cash-some/story.aspx?guid=%7BF9C03C2F%2D15F1%2D4F9F%2DA791%2D8BB8851EFEB0%7D
I can't believe this guys writes for a business news outlet,
he misquotes cybersquatting and gives these web 2.0 guys way too easy a pass.
[[.....]]
Domain names are the most significant thing of value behind many Internet companies.
Hotels.com <--- it's about the name, not Diller. [[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : ::::: ''Diller'' 's the 1 in the top management of the group which owns Hotels.com ]]]]]]]]] CheapTickets.com <--- It was a huge natural search term "before"
it was a brand.
Shopping.com<--- sold for 600 million
because they rebranded from 'dealtime.com'
(which floundered for years before rebranding).
I could go on and on.
[[.....]]
Comments
[[.....]]
Well I can tell you that your message GOT through.
Dow Jones-Telerate found it's way to my post, and then clicked on the link to yours,
after searching for "scott austin"
on Google (blogsearch)
where I with my blogger[[.com]] platform advantage are #1
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : :::::
blogger[[.com]]'s o'[of]
my dear((;oyes-real-very-dear-in-term-o'-stocksprice;)) google
]]]]]]]]]
;--^),
but you can't miss the Frank headline
"Scott Austin Doesn't Quite Get It15 hours ago by Frank Schilling " a couple down
http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&q=%22scott%20austin%22&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d
btw,
blogsearch is a google secret weapon
(maybe not so much any more.. but they've changed the location twice)
Posted by: owen frager June 27, 2007 at 04:22 PM
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : :::::
this post by My Dear Sir Own Frager may seem a little bit off topic ,
but ,
still do i list here just4fun;--^),
]]]]]]]]]
;--^),
[[.....]]
Wow Frank -- your comments are normally insightful, but this post was just plain lame.
You clearly show you're out of touch with Silicon Valley and didn't get the point of the column ... Scott is saying that many good Web start-ups with good ideas AREN'T spending as much money on domain addresses these days. Whether or not that's smart is another story.
Many venture-backed Internet companies with great tech are dreaming up words that don't exist to avoid paying a domainer like yourself big bucks. This isn't true with every start-up, but if you ask a lot of us entrepreneurs around, it's certainly a trend. Venture capitalists usually fund the technology and people, not the domain name.
As Scott says, there are some new cases of VC-BACKED companies that have recently formed around a domain name like back during the tech boom...what has healthcare.com and education.com done over the years bouncing around between owners? Jack squat.
Need a good business model to be a shopping.com, not just a domain name.
Simply put, seems you didn't quite get it.
-Daniel
***FS*** He incorrectly uses the term "cybersquatted".. so he doesn't "quite" get it. That's a derogatory (and incorrect) term in this story's context. I made that clear at the top of my post, everybody else seemed to agree.
Posted by: Daniel June 27, 2007 at 09:23 PM
Daniel,
healthcare.com and education.com have bounced around do nothing
and their vlaue just keeps going up.
And this is because all the smart healthcare companines and schools in this country and around the world do not yet see the value in them NOW.
Just because they do not see the value themselves...does not mean the value is not there.
When they finally do see the value and no how to "unlock" it...its going to cost them 5x-30x more for them...and they still will be getting a deal...just not as good of a deal as now.
___
""Many venture-backed Internet companies with great tech are dreaming up words that don't exist to avoid paying a domainer like yourself big bucks. This isn't true with every start-up, but if you ask a lot of us entrepreneurs around, it's certainly a trend. Venture capitalists usually fund the technology and people, not the domain name.""
__
Frank's not missing anything...this is 1000% backwords thinking on their part.
It like they are putting one quarter into the slot machine
...instead of putting the max of 5 quarters in
...when the jackpot is hit
...they are screwing themselves on the "payoff"
...by only having one quater in the machine.
one quarter= bad domain
five quaters= good domain
__
""As Scott says, there are some new cases of VC-BACKED companies that have recently formed around a domain name like back during the tech boom...what has healthcare.com and education.com done over the years bouncing around between owners? Jack squat. Need a good business model to be a shopping.com, not just a domain name.""
__
This is "forward thinking" because, unlike the "tech bust" of 2000...
there were no "sound business" models back then.
Today, sound internet and domain business models are popping up all over the place and will only excelerate.
I agree you need both...
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : :::::
v[we] do 100.000% agree ,
even our this blog's xxx.xxx% 4[for] generic domains ,
but ,
v'rnt[we-are-not] blindly ,
v will-n-WILL apply this very approach in our own net projet
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
and today,
business models are becoming very sound
which is making good domains even more valuable...
which there are only a limited supply of
.
Peace,Dan
Posted by: Dan June 27, 2007 at 10:43 PM
Sorry...forgot spell-check in my last post. I have a bit of disability... when it comes to sentence structure and spelling and a couple of other things. What are you going do?...LOL
Peace,Dan
Posted by: Dan June 28, 2007 at 12:31 AM
[[.....]]
[[.....]]
June 27, 2007
"And You Want to Be My Latex Salesman..." - Scott Austin Doesn't Quite Get It
Dan sends link to Scott Austin's column...
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/names-now-elusive-cash-some/story.aspx?guid=%7BF9C03C2F%2D15F1%2D4F9F%2DA791%2D8BB8851EFEB0%7D
I can't believe this guys writes for a business news outlet,
he misquotes cybersquatting and gives these web 2.0 guys way too easy a pass.
[[.....]]
Domain names are the most significant thing of value behind many Internet companies.
Hotels.com <--- it's about the name, not Diller. [[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : ::::: ''Diller'' 's the 1 in the top management of the group which owns Hotels.com ]]]]]]]]] CheapTickets.com <--- It was a huge natural search term "before"
it was a brand.
Shopping.com<--- sold for 600 million
because they rebranded from 'dealtime.com'
(which floundered for years before rebranding).
I could go on and on.
[[.....]]
Comments
[[.....]]
Well I can tell you that your message GOT through.
Dow Jones-Telerate found it's way to my post, and then clicked on the link to yours,
after searching for "scott austin"
on Google (blogsearch)
where I with my blogger[[.com]] platform advantage are #1
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : :::::
blogger[[.com]]'s o'[of]
my dear((;oyes-real-very-dear-in-term-o'-stocksprice;)) google
]]]]]]]]]
;--^),
but you can't miss the Frank headline
"Scott Austin Doesn't Quite Get It15 hours ago by Frank Schilling " a couple down
http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&q=%22scott%20austin%22&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d
btw,
blogsearch is a google secret weapon
(maybe not so much any more.. but they've changed the location twice)
Posted by: owen frager June 27, 2007 at 04:22 PM
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : :::::
this post by My Dear Sir Own Frager may seem a little bit off topic ,
but ,
still do i list here just4fun;--^),
]]]]]]]]]
;--^),
[[.....]]
Wow Frank -- your comments are normally insightful, but this post was just plain lame.
You clearly show you're out of touch with Silicon Valley and didn't get the point of the column ... Scott is saying that many good Web start-ups with good ideas AREN'T spending as much money on domain addresses these days. Whether or not that's smart is another story.
Many venture-backed Internet companies with great tech are dreaming up words that don't exist to avoid paying a domainer like yourself big bucks. This isn't true with every start-up, but if you ask a lot of us entrepreneurs around, it's certainly a trend. Venture capitalists usually fund the technology and people, not the domain name.
As Scott says, there are some new cases of VC-BACKED companies that have recently formed around a domain name like back during the tech boom...what has healthcare.com and education.com done over the years bouncing around between owners? Jack squat.
Need a good business model to be a shopping.com, not just a domain name.
Simply put, seems you didn't quite get it.
-Daniel
***FS*** He incorrectly uses the term "cybersquatted".. so he doesn't "quite" get it. That's a derogatory (and incorrect) term in this story's context. I made that clear at the top of my post, everybody else seemed to agree.
Posted by: Daniel June 27, 2007 at 09:23 PM
Daniel,
healthcare.com and education.com have bounced around do nothing
and their vlaue just keeps going up.
And this is because all the smart healthcare companines and schools in this country and around the world do not yet see the value in them NOW.
Just because they do not see the value themselves...does not mean the value is not there.
When they finally do see the value and no how to "unlock" it...its going to cost them 5x-30x more for them...and they still will be getting a deal...just not as good of a deal as now.
___
""Many venture-backed Internet companies with great tech are dreaming up words that don't exist to avoid paying a domainer like yourself big bucks. This isn't true with every start-up, but if you ask a lot of us entrepreneurs around, it's certainly a trend. Venture capitalists usually fund the technology and people, not the domain name.""
__
Frank's not missing anything...this is 1000% backwords thinking on their part.
It like they are putting one quarter into the slot machine
...instead of putting the max of 5 quarters in
...when the jackpot is hit
...they are screwing themselves on the "payoff"
...by only having one quater in the machine.
one quarter= bad domain
five quaters= good domain
__
""As Scott says, there are some new cases of VC-BACKED companies that have recently formed around a domain name like back during the tech boom...what has healthcare.com and education.com done over the years bouncing around between owners? Jack squat. Need a good business model to be a shopping.com, not just a domain name.""
__
This is "forward thinking" because, unlike the "tech bust" of 2000...
there were no "sound business" models back then.
Today, sound internet and domain business models are popping up all over the place and will only excelerate.
I agree you need both...
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : :::::
v[we] do 100.000% agree ,
even our this blog's xxx.xxx% 4[for] generic domains ,
but ,
v'rnt[we-are-not] blindly ,
v will-n-WILL apply this very approach in our own net projet
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
and today,
business models are becoming very sound
which is making good domains even more valuable...
which there are only a limited supply of
.
Peace,Dan
Posted by: Dan June 27, 2007 at 10:43 PM
Sorry...forgot spell-check in my last post. I have a bit of disability... when it comes to sentence structure and spelling and a couple of other things. What are you going do?...LOL
Peace,Dan
Posted by: Dan June 28, 2007 at 12:31 AM
[[.....]]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
