It's time to end the talk of "reg fee"!

[domainseller200]

Frank - first you accuse me of being kind of cheap hooker and then you call me an idiot! Charming!

Stephen.

Well it is obvious you have a habit, or you wouldn't be selling £x,xxx names for £30, unless you were looking for your next fix

 

[websaway]

If that's a dig at me then I am afraid you have no idea what you are talking about. You've made a thousand posts so obviously been on Acorn for a while, yet made 1 trade according to your rating.

I started with one domain, now have more than 4,000 and about 200 websites, so obviously don't know what I am doing.

No,no,no, not a dig at you at all, I've watched you for years and am fully aware of the quality of your porfolio.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Edwin - Perhaps one further question (if you can answer and may strengthen the argument) is do you feel you are actively marketing your domain lists to end users, explaining specific benefits to them and their industry - or on the whole people come to / find you?

The 'selling' part maybe the missing link for some waiting for offers on Sedo...

Well, I had a stand at Internet World in 2008 and 2009, I've also advertised at other tradeshows and exhibitions, bought some magazine ads, and dabbled with PPC over the last few years.

Having said that, I don't proactively market domains as in "track down a particular, targeted user then attempt to sell them a specific domain" - something to experiment with sometime, I guess.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

I think people would be interested to see your actual numbers of domains sold year on year, it'll put some meat on the bone, or is that a secret?

More than 50, less than 100 in 2010.

 

[FagEnd]

There are ladies who sell there services for £50, there are other ladies who sell there services for £2000 per night, the product is comparable but the big difference is one thinks there services has a greater value than the other and therefore it has.

I've tried both ends of that market and it always has the same end result

 

[FagEnd]

When did this thread turn in to an Edwin lynching mob? I don't see anything he wrote as controversial. He does his thing and we do ours. I sell scraps to cover costs, he sells scraps at extortionate prices to make profit. I know which situation I'd rather be in. We are all selling the same shit, but if you can convince someone your shit is worth more then Kudos to you

 

[wbwb is verified member.]

It is a thread started by Edwin with a link to his blog, with a disclaimer in the original post staying how he was "sure this will stir up some debate".

So I wouldn't say it's an Edwin lynching mob, more people disagreeing with others' opinions/models which is perfectly acceptable to do.

 

[FagEnd]

It is a thread started by Edwin with a link to his blog, with a disclaimer in the original post staying how he was "sure this will stir up some debate".

So I wouldn't say it's an Edwin lynching mob, more people disagreeing with others' opinions/models which is perfectly acceptable to do.

Fair enough, #@ck 'im then, lynch away. I hate folks that are more successful than me anyway, deserve all they get

 

[Bailey]

No malice in any post - I consider Edwin a 'domaining' friend. (or is that fiend :evil: ) Besides we're both members elsewhere.

I worry that sometimes the skills that come natural to one individual can occasionally be seen as a "given" by another less skilled individual. Edwin does have a knack of making things sound/read as a simpler formula than in fact they are

 

[FagEnd]

There is NO skill in domaining. You were either on the boat in the 90's or you missed it.
That's not a skill, it's just pot luck. It takes no skill to spend a fiver every 2 years to renew a domain you registered years ago.

Dropcatching might get you the odd few domains, but the proper good ones will never drop, even when the tagholder can't afford/forgets to renew them, nominet allows extra time for them. (lots of examples of this, eg tagnames, they get to go months past normal dropping dates and nominet let them renew) Why can't I, as a nominet registrar, get the same treatment as tagnames? TAG = names

 

[Bailey]

There is NO skill in domaining. You were either on the boat in the 90's or you missed it.
That's not a skill, it's just pot luck. It takes no skill to spend a fiver every 2 years to renew a domain you registered years ago.

That is a strange outlook - I wouldn't even want to start to reply from that base. If I get a 'second life' I give some thought to a reply.

But For a damn start - you would have made dozens and dozens of "promised world" type errors - Some call it a learning curve and I know where I do well and it certainly wasn't from the early regs I can tell you

 

[FagEnd]

That is a strange outlook - I wouldn't even want to start to reply from that base. If I get a 'second life' I give some thought to a reply.

But For a damn start - you would have made dozens and dozens of "promised world" type errors - Some call it a learning curve and I know where I do well and it certainly wasn't from the early regs I can tell you

Why is that a strange outlook? It's the truth.

It seems to me like you are the deluded one, you are not going to get a "second life" in the domain industry. If you missed out on the "first life" then you are bottom feeding. Fucking fact. And a fact I've always acknowledged for myself. I missed out on the 90's bonanza, and I know I'm never going to own the best domains without paying shitloads of money for them. If you think otherwise then you are in the wrong business.

 

[websaway]

There is NO skill in domaining. You were either on the boat in the 90's or you missed it.
That's not a skill, it's just pot luck. It takes no skill to spend a fiver every 2 years to renew a domain you registered years ago.

Everything is easy with the benefit of hindsight.

 

[robrob is verified member.]

Everything is easy with the benefit of hindsight.

Great point well made.

The hidden costs of domaining are often forgotton, and that can be money and time.

I was still in school when most 'got in first'. I better give up now... zzzzzz

 

[BREWSTERS]

This discussion seems to have inevitably gone off track.

My thoughts on some points made early on.

Firstly, there are several valid business models to work; none are more relevent than the others - whatever works for you, go for it. Ultimately though, if you can show that your average sales price is £xxxx, then you have far more options than if it's only £xx - and the quality of the names is less of a factor; it's what you can achieve with them.

Some comments have given the impression that as domainers, we are providing a service rather that a product. We're not*.
The property vs. domain name analogy is one which will never go away and as such, we are selling a property. Once we sell it, it's gone to us forever. If you can afford to wait to maximise its value, surely it's best to do so. The only way you can do this is by owning enough domains to provide the turnover required.

*Or are we?
Recently, my thoughts on this subject have lead me in a new direction - that of leasing. Nothing new in that, I know, but when you think about it, it makes perfect sense.

Unlike real estate, we don't have a large buy-in cost, so we can rent out very very cheaply; far cheaper than just about any other form of advertising. If you have a generic descriptive domain that gets 30 or so type ins per month, why not lease that domain to a prospective buyer for say £5 per month? Less than 20p per click. On a name that has a £3 per year carry cost, that's a great return. You get to keep the domain and benefit from its capital growth. Hopefully, the key to finding 'domain tennants' will be in not being greedy with the rental fees. Anything over 25p per month is profit. Not only that, but if you can show a portfolio of leased names with a regular rental income, you have then got a product worth selling, either in part or whole.

Such low rental fees should make it a no-brainer for any company who is currently using Adwords. Rather than them having to consider rebranding or brand dilution etc, they will simply be buying traffic with the added benefit of being able to use that domain for other things such as placement testing etc.

Some of the wealthiest people are landlords who have held onto their property whilst getting paid rent. We need a pittance to cover our carry costs - £1 per month would provide a return far higher than just about any investment.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Unlike real estate, we don't have a large buy-in cost, so we can rent out very very cheaply; far cheaper than just about any other form of advertising. If you have a generic descriptive domain that gets 30 or so type ins per month, why not lease that domain to a prospective buyer for say £5 per month? Less than 20p per click. On a name that has a £3 per year carry cost, that's a great return. You get to keep the domain and benefit from its capital growth. Hopefully, the key to finding 'domain tennants' will be in not being greedy with the rental fees. Anything over 25p per month is profit. Not only that, but if you can show a portfolio of leased names with a regular rental income, you have then got a product worth selling, either in part or whole.

That's an interesting way of looking at things. However, the "damage" somebody can cause to a domain name, for example by using it to spam, by promoting it inappropriately, or indeed even by associating it with a very specific product, company or industry for a couple of years and then suddenly dropping the lease (forcing the domain name to be redirected elsewhere) is potentially huge.

Legal protections could be put in place to govern a lot of the above, but there's no margin to draw up and enforce the type of contracts that would be required if you're talking about pennies or pounds a month.

Not to mention the "credibility factor" in that somebody in a management/decision role at a company of any size simply won't be willing to take the time to get educated about the benefits of a service that costs a few pounds a month - they're "on the clock" on company time, and that time's far too valuable to spend it grappling with something they're initially going to be completely unfamiliar with.

That's not to say leasing wouldn't work - it is probably a very exciting business model, if done right and with the appropriate legal and other groundwork up front - but it's going to need to be priced at a more "credible" level of probably no less than £50-100 a month to get any traction at all.

Expanding on the above, there's potentially a new service opportunity for a turnkey, credit card billed domain leasing service, where the lease-taker can set up the arrangement with a few clicks and pay a deposit plus the first quarter's lease up front, giving them instant access to certain DNS settings for the domain name. Then (say) 15 days before the end of each quarter, they will be rebilled for the following quarter, allowing them to maintain their control over the domain.

Taking this one step further, the leasing provider could ultimately take the domain name "into trust" (with all appropriate/necessary safeguards) thus reassuring the lease-holder that the owner of the name literally can't run away with it/sell it from under them, thus disrupting a marketing push.

 

[BREWSTERS]

That's an interesting way of looking at things. However, the "damage" somebody can cause to a domain name, for example by using it to spam, by promoting it inappropriately, or indeed even by associating it with a very specific product, company or industry for a couple of years and then suddenly dropping the lease (forcing the domain name to be redirected elsewhere) is potentially huge.

Regarding spam, they wouldn't have access to use email - I'm thinking of a simple redirect.

If a company used the domain for any length of time, thus associating it with their particular product or service, then there is an incentive for them to buy it at some stage...or an incentive for another company to rent it (a water tight agreement will need to be in place so that 'rights' in the name cannot be obtained through such use).

Legal protections could be put in place to govern a lot of the above, but there's no margin to draw up and enforce the type of contracts that would be required if you're talking about pennies or pounds a month.

Not individually, but one agreement to cover hundreds or thousands of domains would be cost effective.

Not to mention the "credibility factor" in that somebody in a management/decision role at a company of any size simply won't be willing to take the time to get educated about the benefits of a service that costs a few pounds a month - they're "on the clock" on company time, and that time's far too valuable to spend it grappling with something they're initially going to be completely unfamiliar with.

This is where you would need to deal with whoever runs their online marketing. You'd be selling better traffic than Adwords for usually considerably less.

That's not to say leasing wouldn't work - it is probably a very exciting business model, if done right and with the appropriate legal and other groundwork up front - but it's going to need to be priced at a more "credible" level of probably no less than £50-100 a month to get any traction at all.

In my eyes, that price level (or more) is fine so long as the type in traffic justifies it. This needs to be a cheaper alternative for the tennant.

Expanding on the above, there's potentially a new service opportunity for a turnkey, credit card billed domain leasing service, where the lease-taker can set up the arrangement with a few clicks and pay a deposit plus the first quarter's lease up front, giving them instant access to certain DNS settings for the domain name. Then (say) 15 days before the end of each quarter, they will be rebilled for the following quarter, allowing them to maintain their control over the domain.

Agreed upto a point. I only envisage them getting a redirect rather than any other function from the domain (at this stage anyway).

Taking this one step further, the leasing provider could ultimately take the domain name "into trust" (with all appropriate/necessary safeguards) thus reassuring the lease-holder that the owner of the name literally can't run away with it/sell it from under them, thus disrupting a marketing push.

Would be appropriate for higher value domains.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Regarding spam, they wouldn't have access to use email - I'm thinking of a simple redirect.

That's no protection at all - you don't need to have control over the MX records to send email that's "from" (or references within the body of the email) a given domain name.

I agree with most of your other points, except that in the case of Adwords the companies could easily be spending 3, 4, 5 or 6 figures a month so it was worth their while to go through the "learning curve" but it's simply not worth their time to "understand" a service that only costs a few pounds a month. The psychology of pricing comes into play, and you're de-facto saying "This isn't worth more than a few quid" so they're simply not interested.

It's easy enough to make £50/month or £100/month look like a cheaper alternative than buying: just push the sale price of the domain up, and make the leasing costs look like a relative bargain by comparison...

 

[BREWSTERS]

That's no protection at all - you don't need to have control over the MX records to send email that's "from" (or references within the body of the email) a given domain name.

Only to the same degree that they can do that with any domain name. I'm sure most of us have had return emails from spammers who've used our domain name for such a purpose. They are less likely I imagine, to use a return address for a domain they are paying for.

I agree with most of your other points, except that in the case of Adwords the companies could easily be spending 3, 4, 5 or 6 figures a month so it was worth their while to go through the "learning curve" but it's simply not worth their time to "understand" a service that only costs a few pounds a month. The psychology of pricing comes into play, and you're de-facto saying "This isn't worth more than a few quid" so they're simply not interested.

Yes, I get that, but for a domain that's only getting a handful of type ins per month, they (companies with that kind of adspend) wouldn't be my target anyway except for a domain with lots of traffic and hence, would warrant a higher rental fee anyway.

It's easy enough to make £50/month or £100/month look like a cheaper alternative than buying: just push the sale price of the domain up, and make the leasing costs look like a relative bargain by comparison...

I doubt they would want to lease for long if they weren't getting value. This is getting us back to the earlier arguments of selling for £30 or holding out for £2000.

My aim would be to have portfolios of domains which are being leased out, and therefore producing regular income, which can be packaged up and sold on, either in part (sell shares in each portfolio) or outright on the back of the excellent percentage returns.

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Yes, I get that, but for a domain that's only getting a handful of type ins per month, they (companies with that kind of adspend) wouldn't be my target anyway except for a domain with lots of traffic and hence, would warrant a higher rental fee anyway.

I think a pitch based on typeins is the wrong approach to take.

You can easily have a domain with 5,000+ exacts on GAKT which gets less than 10 typeins a month. Purely on a "value of those typeins" basis, that's a pretty poor business proposition!

However, that same domain name could be used to dramatically reduce PPC costs by boosting the CTR of a PPC ad campaign. Or it could be used as an easier-to-remember offline ad URL redirect. Or in many other ways, each of which has a far, far higher return than the theoretical value of that typein traffic.