Showing posts with label easy4branding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label easy4branding. Show all posts

Saturday, 18 August 2007

CreditCards.com files for IPO

0 response
http://www.highendwebnames.com/blog/2007/08/10/business-investing-finance/creditcardscom-files-for-ipo/
[[.....]]

According to Andrew at DomainNameWire
http://domainnamewire.com/2007/08/10/creditcardscom-files-for-ipo/
CreditCards.com has filed to raise up to $115 million in an IPO.
The domain name CreditCards.com was sold for $2.75 million in 2005
and then built into a business and resold for more than $130 million in 2006
This is a good example of a generic domain being developed into a valuable business in a short period of time
Generic domains are so valuable,
because they receive targeted type-in traffic from the get-go and
because they’re relatively easy to build an online business on
For instance,
they’re often easier to brand than a domain consisting of a made-up term

From Domain Name Wire: : ::::::::::
CreditCards.com’s S-1 filing is a treasure trove of information about the company’s traffic (they actually have more than one domain driving traffic) and earnings per visitor. In the first half of this year, the company received 5.899M visitors and earned $4.64 per visitor.
(…)
In 2006, CreditCards.com had
$43M in revenues and a net income of
$18.4M.
That[[[[[[[[[That!!!!!!!!!]]]]]]]]] net margin shows
why a business based primarily on a domain name and search engine optimization,
and
which carries no inventory,
is such an appealing investment opportunity.

[[.....]]
[[.....]]
[[.....]]
[[.....]]

http://domainnamewire.com/2007/08/13/domain-roundtable-kicks-off-in-seattle/
[[.....]]
Domain Roundtable Kicks Off in Seattle
Monday, August 13th, 2007

[[.....]]

Mike “Zappy” Zapolin of Internet Real Estate gave his keynote.

[[.....]]

Internet Real Estate sold CreditCards.com for $2.75M in 2004.
The buyer, Click Success, turned around
and sold the domain and its credit card portal
to an Austin Ventures-backed group in 2006 for about $150M.
On Friday,
CreditCards.com announced it plans to go public at a valuation many times that
Zapolin briefly addressed the sale. Rather than kick himself for selling to early,
Zapolin said it’s just proof that there’s still lots of opportunity for domain name investors

[[.....]]
[[.....]]
[[.....]]
[[.....]]

http://domainnamewire.com/2007/08/10/creditcardscom-files-for-ipo/
[[.....]]

CreditCards.com Files for IPO
Friday, August 10th, 2007
CreditCards.com has filed to raise up to $115M in an initial public offering.

Earlier this morning, CreditCards.com, an online credit card portal that built its business around a valuable domain name, filed to raise up to $115M in an initial public offering. Although the exact valuation of the company is not yet known, the company’s S-1 filing with the SEC validates my previous assumption that the 2006 purchase of the company was north of $100M.


In October 2006, we paid approximately $133.8 million in cash (including
approximately $350,000 in transaction fees and expenses) and issued
approximately 2.1 million shares of Series A-1 convertible redeemable preferred
stock at a price per share of $7.82 to the owner of the Predecessor in exchange
for substantially all of the assets of the Predecessor.

That values the company at more than $133.8M.

Internet Real Estate Group sold the domain to Click Success in 2004 for “only” $2.75M. Daniel H. Smith pocketed $97.7M from the sale to an Austin Ventures-backed group in 2006. The purchase by the group in 2006 from Click Success was financed partially with debt from American Capital Strategies
(NASDAQ: ACAS).

CreditCards.com’s S-1 filing is a treasure trove of information about the company’s traffic
(they actually have more than one domain driving traffic) and earnings per visitor. In the first half of this year, the company received 5.899M visitors and earned $4.64 per visitor.
The traffic was up only slightly from the same period last year,
but
revenue per visitor increased 46%:



The increase [in revenue per visitor] was primarily driven by higher number of
offers and conversion rates of website visitors into submitted or approved
applications and higher prices that we negotiated and received from credit card
issuers.
In 2006, CreditCards.com had $43M in revenues and a net income of $18.4M. That net margin shows why a business based primarily on a domain name and search engine optimization, and which carries no inventory, is such an appealing investment opportunity.

- Posted in Domain Sales by Andrew

-->del.icio.us Digg it Furl Scuttle Shadows Spurl StumbleUpon Yahoo MyWeb

Comments

[[.....]]

RF
August 10th, 2007 10:43 pm
Andrew,
Cannot find the link to the S-1 filing that you discussed in article.
Please post a URL link to the S-1 filing that talk about.
Thank you.
-->

Andrew
August 11th, 2007 12:59 am
here\’s the link to the s-1:
http://tinyurl.com/yudlar

[[.....]]
[[.....]]
[[.....]]
[[.....]]

Friday, 6 July 2007

`` Generic domains will be able to slap their name on APIs and white labeled products ''

0 response
[[[[[[[[[ DoMainTools is the domaintools
which each-n-every [even-novice] domainer should have ;--^),
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
http://blog.domaintools.com/2007/05/kodak-branding-compared-to-domain-names/
http://domaintools.com/
[[.....]]

Kodak Branding compared to Domain Names
Submit to Digg.com!

May 25th, 2007 by Jay Westerdal

[[.....]]

Everything was going great for Kodak until they bumped up into the digital age.
The Kodak’s technology sucks
when you compare it to the digital stuff we have now.

[[.....]]

But all is not lost for Kodak.
Their technology is crap but they still have
their name -
their famous brand.
Now, this is where I compare Kodak to Domain Names.
Watch closely!

Kodak can suck as much as they want.
They have a brand which is estimated to be the seventh most famous brand in the world and worth $4.4
Billion.
Billion with a “B”.
To take advantage of their brand,
all they need to do it[[[[[[[[[is]]]]]]]]]
slap their “Kodak” name on a generic digital camera
made by any number of Chinese factories
and it is instantly able to sell for a lot more.
A Brand’s mental traffic is the same as a generic domain’s physical traffic.
Generic domains will be able to
slap their name on APIs and white labeled products
and it will create instant profit for the domain owner and the other company.
Parking pages on Generic domains are crap, we all know it.
But
the key to the real value in this equation is in the name.
Everybody who owns a Generic Domain name gets an infinite amount
of Re-Do’s.
Keep playing with the backend (Yahoo/Google).
Parking pages in 2007 may be crap.
But
parking pages in 2020 may be full blown portals that keep visitors coming back.
Only one person can control the name, and if you do,
you may be selling yourself short if you ask for only a few years revenue.

Eastman Co. can sell the “Kodak” brand and trademark to Sony for $4.4 Billion.
How much can you sell a Cameras.com or DigitalCameras.com for?
Recently it was about
$1 Million. Hmmm, I think
$1 Million looks dirt cheap.

« Previous Post Next Post »

Posted in Brand Creation

Comments

domain18682 Says: after publication. -->
May 25th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
You pose an interesting analogy.
RCA is a brand that is solely outsourced today

[[.....]]

Saturday, 23 June 2007

Work.com for sale for $300,000,000

0 response
http://blog.domaintools.com/2007/06/work-dotcom-for-sale-for-3m/#comment-746

Work.com for sale for $300,000,000

June 22nd, 2007 by Jay Westerdal
[[.....]]
Don’t get me wrong, I think the reason the company did so well was because of the press and branding it got when they bought the domain for $7.5 Million in Stock. It turns out to be $2 Million and if the company sells for $350 Million it would mean that buying the Brand cost the company less then 1% of its final sale price. So in perspective, the domain was cheap at $2M.
This is the reason I like to buy brandable domain names. A lot of credibility is given to a good brand and I don’t think these founders of Business.com would have had that creditability without their good brand. Why do kids of famous actors have such an easy time becoming successful? It is because of their parent’s branded last name, not because they are better actors than kids their age.

Doors open for famous people and good dotcom brandables. You don’t need to have a famous father any more. Just a good domain name.

Posted in Domain Sales
[[.....]]

Business.com[[in-auction-again]], $300 million and Up

0 response
[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes : :::::
1 of the most potentiallest[potential'est];-^)), buyers of Business may b Business2 ,
Business2.com may have been sending 100.000%
free typo-traffics daily+4ever to Business.com,
+
Business2.com may also have been leaking many Business2's internal secrets to Business.com
via any-email-etc@Business2.com e.t.c.
Business may not know how-to-say-thank-you-Business2 is enough;--^), 2w
]]]]]]]]]

http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2287856/19501206
http://frankschilling.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/06/businesscom-300.html
[[.....]]
June 22, 2007
Business.com, $300 million and Up
http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=mergersNews&storyID=2007-06-22T160302Z_01_N22479402_RTRIDST_0_BUSINESS-COM-SALE-UPDATE-1.XML

Widely reported on other sites and forums.. I'm a bit behind the ball as the vacation continues through Sunday.
I find announcements like this surprising because the name is clearly the main thing of value in this enterprise. The software, content, user base are relatively duplicable through a little elbow grease and traffic arbitrage. Now I'm not saying that the domain name isn't worth (potential) $300 million, but I am saying that the rest of the machinations behind the curtain.. everything else is easily duplicable and not worth 300 million.. JMO of course.
This and the recent TRAFFIC auction in New York City when 217 names could have sold for cumulative 63 million, could illuminate the kind of world we might expect to find in the future.
Paul Sloan reflects on this potential deal here:
http://blogs.business2.com/sloan/2007/06/businesscom-for.html

Posted at 12:37 PM in Domain Names (Domains)

TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
[[.....]]

[[[[[[[[[ 'the edittor notes again : :::::
1 of the labels of this post is
`` buyin' a great domain = a kind o' great ad + a forever asset ''
this 'Business' case does do a best example of our this view
i.e. : :::::
----------------------------------------------------------------
even Business couldnt fetch anything back in this auction-again ,
but ,
still , @ this time , Business does have been
still
fetching back the worldssssssssswide coverrage of news e.t.c. ,
many of them being of mainstreams , e.g. : wsj or reuters e.t.c. ,
how many millions USD o'[of] extra worth does that b[be] ??
----------------------------------------------------------------
when Business was sold @ USD 7.500.000 @ 1999 ,
then 't created the instant worldssssssssswide coverrage of news e.t.c. ,
many of them being of mainstreams , e.g. : wsj or reuters e.t.c. ,
online+offline ,
how many millions USD o'[of] extra worth does that b[be] ??
----------------------------------------------------------------
when Business was sold @ USD 7.500.000 @ 1999 ,
then 't created that worldsrecord[worldrecord] until recently ,
then
when ever the people[worldswide] were to say something about the most dear[expensive] domain ,
then they referred to Business.com ,
how many millions USD o'[of] extra worth does that b[be] ??
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
]]]]]]]]]