MobilePhones.co.uk - 91K - A Bargain?

[bb99]

But I think rather than bashing Sedo, we need to come up with suggestions of how the auction process can be improved in the interest of the marketplace.

...

I know Sedo can get this right. Let's give them the (positive) encouragement they need.

Angie I admire your positivity in what is a very shitty situation.

The way I see it is that Sedo have been in this business for over 10 years and have been market leader for most of that. So, if they haven't got it right by now, they never will

 

[julian]

some good points.

It seems a very strange argument that the name isn't worth the money simply because people don't all type mobile phones into the search box. Search engine marketing and marketing in general is so much more than that.

but people do bang 'mobile phones' into a search box but people also type 'boats' into a search box too.

also in that case might as well go and by regfeemobilephones.co.uk domain if goign to spend mega bucks on branding launch.

And if someone types in Nokia 95, there's no reason that they won't be directed to mobilephones.co.uk with the correct seo in place.

the by time they get that sorted we'll be using ear pieces connected to our writst watches.

Anyone else's subjective valuation is meaningless anyway. A lot of people seem to confuse something's value and its price - they are not the same by a long chalk.

they may not be the same but If I pay 250k for a house I know what value i'd expect to see from that house.

We have no idea of Angie's proposed business strategy for its development or how the numbers stack up for her. As I've said before 100k is cheap if the name is going to make you a million. Expensive if its going to make you £1000

More the latter I think. I think best bet is short term corporate lottery ticket flip.


Angie - hope it all goes well for you.[/QUOTE]

 

[badger]

Fact 1. The domain is parked at sedo - therefore its indisputable that the owner doesnt have a sedo account.

In which case its incredible to think that anyone bar the owner started the original auction.

I dont know the sedo system but I would be amazed to think that you could list names for sale in an auction where you weren't the actual owner?

Anyone care to clarify?

 

[pugyrob]

Angie I admire your positivity in what is a very shitty situation.

The way I see it is that Sedo have been in this business for over 10 years and have been market leader for most of that. So, if they haven't got it right by now, they never will

absolutely. The market place is there for the taking, i predict it wont be Sedo all the way in 2 years by any means, too many holes in their service. Id be surprised if they were still market leader. Not to knock them for the sake of it, the employees are nice people, just they dont seem to allocate enough resource in the UK to deal with things effectively.

 

[bluerock]

Fact 1. The domain is parked at sedo - therefore its indisputable that the owner doesnt have a sedo account.

In which case its incredible to think that anyone bar the owner started the original auction.

I dont know the sedo system but I would be amazed to think that you could list names for sale in an auction where you weren't the actual owner?

Anyone care to clarify?

6 months ago I sold a domain which I had parked at Sedo.
A few weeks ago I had an offer on the domain and could have "accepted" or sent to auction.
The reason this happened was that the new owner never bothered to change nameservers/transfer from sedo.

It can happen!

 

[TinkyWinky]

The reason this happened was that the new owner never bothered to change nameservers/transfer from sedo.

But was that still against your named account at SEDO?

This would mean the Registrant / SEDO account names would have been different.

Thus - SEDO would have to bear some responsibility for not matching domain reg details to sedo account details - especially when put to auction for proof of ownership?

This could be interesting if this was the case!?

Whatever happens in this particular case, SEDO still has to improve their service all round and especially in the UK. I agree individuals are good to deal with - the processes and rigid structure not so.

TW

 

[ratboy]

I just get the feeling Sedo is grossly understaffed. I have emailed them on a number of occasions, only for the enquiry to be ignored. It simply isn't good enough.

I have had some good sales with Sedo, often prices are boosted just by using the system - so the model works. Sedo doesn't. Waiting for someone to bring a solid system to the market and they have my vote for sure.

Angie - feel sorry for you - hope it gets sorted out. Sedo should check before a top level auction, or any auction, goes forward. God only knows what the UK office does with its time - because surely this is exactly the kind of sale they need to justify their existance.

EDIT: presuming it is a cock up with ownership and not something else.

 

[diablo]

some good points.



but people do bang 'mobile phones' into a search box but people also type 'boats' into a search box too.

also in that case might as well go and by regfeemobilephones.co.uk domain if goign to spend mega bucks on branding launch.



the by time they get that sorted we'll be using ear pieces connected to our writst watches.




they may not be the same but If I pay 250k for a house I know what value i'd expect to see from that house.



More the latter I think. I think best bet is short term corporate lottery ticket flip.


Angie - hope it all goes well for you.

You seem to be going round in circles with your argument. I didn't say people didn't put mobile phones into the search box - just that not all people did, which was your original point anyway.

I don't understand your point re regfeemobilephones.co.uk - from a branding point of view it isn't worth anything like mobilephones.co.uk. This is exactly why phones.co.uk has been bought by the heavily marketed but far from memorable domain name BuyMobilePhones.net.

As for SEO, anyone marketing phones properly would already be seeking to optimise pages for phones due for release in six, nine, 12 months time anyway.

And it's not a case that price and value "may not be the same". They are not the same. One huge problem with today's society is that we know the price of everything, but the value of very little.

That's true of houses as well as domain names. If you pay 250k for a house all you have established is the price you were willing to pay for it. Nothing more. Based on what value you would derive from owning that house. I may value it completely differently. If it was a three bed 250k house and I wanted a six bed, it would hold little value for me.

 

[julian]

I do not dispute thAT mobilephones is probably better than buymobilephones.net but I find that users will use what their given when it comes to branding FaceBook won't be changing their regfee name to SocialNetworking.com anytime soon. If you could rewind the clock then starting off with phones.com would proably be the winner. Given how important search is becoming its longevity as a search term that relates to finding targeted user and converting it to a sale coupled with the fact there is already an established brand of mobiles.co.uk and soon probably phones.co.uk i'm not sure where this generic fits in long term - if its purely via search then its back to my original point of its real viability as a long term investment.

I still think its a fantastic name but at least 5 years behind in terms of dev.

You seem to be going round in circles with your argument. I didn't say people didn't put mobile phones into the search box - just that not all people did, which was your original point anyway.

I don't understand your point re regfeemobilephones.co.uk - from a branding point of view it isn't worth anything like mobilephones.co.uk. This is exactly why phones.co.uk has been bought by the heavily marketed but far from memorable domain name BuyMobilePhones.net.

As for SEO, anyone marketing phones properly would already be seeking to optimise pages for phones due for release in six, nine, 12 months time anyway.

And it's not a case that price and value "may not be the same". They are not the same. One huge problem with today's society is that we know the price of everything, but the value of very little.

That's true of houses as well as domain names. If you pay 250k for a house all you have established is the price you were willing to pay for it. Nothing more. Based on what value you would derive from owning that house. I may value it completely differently. If it was a three bed 250k house and I wanted a six bed, it would hold little value for me.

 

[retired_member13]

.... when it comes to branding FaceBook won't be changing their regfee name to SocialNetworking.com anytime soon....

Facebook.com paid a reported $200,000 for the name "Facebook.com", they were previously using the regfee name TheFacebook.com.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/01/facebook_domain_dispute/

 

[Frog]

Sedo are a nightmare, they never even processed my fax in time to allow me to bid on this time. I wasn't going to go as high as 91k so it never ended up having an effect on the outcome, but it wasn't fair on me or the seller to deny me the chance - they didn't know how high I was going to go.

 

[Americar]

I have not noticed anybody (buyer or under bidder) nor anybody else state that this sedo auction was a "reserve met" auction ... so was it

"reserve has been met" ?

I presume that it was but nobody has mentioned it ...

"reserve has been met the name will be sold to the highest bidder"

 

[bensd]

I have not noticed anybody (buyer or under bidder) nor anybody else state that this sedo auction was a "reserve met" auction ... so was it

"reserve has been met" ?

I presume that it was but nobody has mentioned it ...

"reserve has been met the name will be sold to the highest bidder"

The domain was sent to auction with an opening bid of £25k (no reserve)

 

[julian]

FaceBook.com value then is because of the value of the brand nothing more, and the potential variants of the generic term mobilephones cropping up will just dilute the potential brand, not enhance it - mobilephonesuk, emobilephones, mymobilephones thats one problem with generic names but that is another story.

Facebook.com paid a reported $200,000 for the name "Facebook.com", they were previously using the regfee name TheFacebook.com.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/01/facebook_domain_dispute/

 

[newguy]

The worth of 'facebook.com' likely only came about due to the existence and success of 'thefacebook.com'

 

[rob]

The worth of 'facebook.com' likely only came about due to the existence and success of 'thefacebook.com'

It would be like having YearBook.co.uk or something ie. not a total regfee name!

 

[Edwin]

Proving something using the success of Facebook is backwards, anyway.

It's very easy to reverse-engineer "facts" by starting with very successful sites and working backwards ("Hey, eBay, YouTube, Facebook, Woot etc. never needed a generic domain name!") but that's like taking the 8 finalists from the Olympics 100m sprint and from there extrapolating the "fact" that everyone in the world runs a sub-10s 100m! In reality, for every runner in that race, there are 300 million people who run slower...

In other words, the example's worthless since it's selected post-facto based solely on its own success...

 

[Paullas]

ive removed all the bitching threads after numerous complaints so please back on topic in hand.

 

[julian]

you owuld say that becuae u only care about generic names. It sounds like I'm against them but i'm not I think their good but not the be all and end all.

So why did MS not buy, brand and use SearchEngine.com instead of Bing.com

Proving something using the success of Facebook is backwards, anyway.

It's very easy to reverse-engineer "facts" by starting with very successful sites and working backwards ("Hey, eBay, YouTube, Facebook, Woot etc. never needed a generic domain name!") but that's like taking the 8 finalists from the Olympics 100m sprint and from there extrapolating the "fact" that everyone in the world runs a sub-10s 100m! In reality, for every runner in that race, there are 300 million people who run slower...

In other words, the example's worthless since it's selected post-facto based solely on its own success...

 

[websaway]

you owuld say that becuae u only care about generic names. It sounds like I'm against them but i'm not I think their good but not the be all and end all.

So why did MS not buy, brand and use SearchEngine.com instead of Bing.com

I think the answer to your question julian is, if you've got huge financial clout you brand, for those that don't generics are a cost efficient way of promoting your business, the most cost efficient way IMO.