londonads.net

xblink · Jun 29, 2013

Any thoughts on this one people ?

thanks

Retired_Member38 · Jun 29, 2013

Nobody builds a brand on a .net without owning the .co.uk / .com, which it doesn't look like you own. So the domain has zero value from a brand point of view.

Nobody is searching Google for 'London ads'. So the domain has zero value from an seo point of view.

So I would say this domain has a negative value.

Bailey · Jun 30, 2013

Monkey said:
Nobody builds a brand on a .net without owning the .co.uk / .com, which it doesn't look like you own. So the domain has zero value from a brand point of view.

Nobody is searching Google for 'London ads'. So the domain has zero value from an seo point of view.

So I would say this domain has a negative value.

Definitely earning your 'Reds' Monkey

Retired_Member38 · Jun 30, 2013

Then feel free to either post your own valuation of the domain, or point out what is wrong with my valuation.

If it was free to register right now, would you register it? If not then it clearly has a negative value - if you registered it you would need to pay for it. And you'd need to pay to renew it.

Bailey · Jun 30, 2013

It could work quite well - It needs, somebody (with the money and the mindset) to latch-on to it. . The domain says "London adverts on the Net".

Would I buy It, The answers No - Good wording has to look 'Good' as well as have meaning is my investment criteria. But that at least that is better than some of your Monkey Criteria.

Retired_Member38 · Jun 30, 2013

Come on Bailey.... you're not doing anyone any favours by encouraging them when they've registered a clearly poor quality domain.

Nobody with 'the money and the mindset' is going to buy a .net domain with no search volume and no route to being a brand since its a poor extension.

I've said its a bad domain name, and I've explained why - although a negative opinion, its a million times more helpful than lying and saying 'it could work quite well'.

Bailey · Jun 30, 2013

Sorry to say to a new-poster on Acorn, but you are full of sh#t..

And No - you haven't explained why..it doesn't work as a domain.

You response to the initial post is a random little rant - and that is the way it will be read, why not post constructively instead of being read like a newbie on steroids

Retired_Member38 · Jun 30, 2013

I made two clear points - the first being that nobody is going to build a brand on a .net domain without owning the other extensions. If you feel otherwise, feel free to provide examples.

My 2nd point was that the search volume was so low, that it has no real commercial value there. If you feel otherwise, feel free to provide examples.

There is no way to dress this up... it was a domain that wasn't worth registering. Its unfair and unhelpful to tell the registrant anything other than that. It was a £5 mistake, and a lesson worth learning.

Retired_Member42 · Jun 30, 2013

It could work quite well - It needs, somebody (with the money and the mindset) to latch-on to it.

You could say this for absolutely any domain. Any domain with money and mindset thrown at it can be successful. That's irrelevant in the appraisal of this specific domain.

The domain says "London adverts on the Net".

So does londonadvertsonthenet.co.uk - should I buy it? It's on free reg...

Domains should primarily be valued on brandability and/or SEO value. This domain has none of those as Monkey has pointed out. I don't consider saying something could "work quite well" if someone put a site on it and thrown money at is a good DOMAIN appraisal which is what this forum is for.

Finally, please don't assume people are newbies because they've only just started posting on the forum. That's twice you've implied that Monkey is inexperienced in the domain industry. Based on what? His Acorn post count? He's given a lot more value and insight to the OP of this thread than you have and if you're experienced as you say you are, you shouldn't be valuing a domain based on how good it is if someone threw money at it.

Bailey · Jun 30, 2013

Carry-on Monkey, Seems like you've been well worked-out by the membership here already.

The better Criticisms of a domain come from an understanding of the market, not the blind-mans reference points, that you seem so apt to quote

Bailey · Jun 30, 2013

And fair 'defence' comment Redemption - that's what we are all here for, I take nothing personally but this Monkey seems to want to post - no matter what value he adds. - Just an observation

Retired_Member38 · Jun 30, 2013

Bailey said:
And fair 'defence' comment Redemption - that's what we are all here for, I take nothing personally but this Monkey seems to want to post - no matter what value he adds.

So it was a dislike of my past posts, rather than any valid critique of the content of what I posted.

This is a rhetorical question... no need to answer it. If Edwin, Stephen, or some other random member with a 2007 Acorn registered date and a green rep bar had posted exactly what I did, what would your response have been?

retired_member29 · Jun 30, 2013

Monkey said:
So it was a dislike of my past posts, rather than any valid critique of the content of what I posted.

This is a rhetorical question... no need to answer it. If Edwin, Stephen, or some other random member with a 2007 Acorn registered date and a green rep bar had posted exactly what I did, what would your response have been?

Nope but you have been acting like a nob majority of the time so what sort of response do you expect back when you are actually (being serious). Redemption being your minion doesn't bode well for him either imo.

Retired_Member38 · Jun 30, 2013

Okay Scott, then feel free to post your own valuation of this domain, or poke holes in my attempt to.

Look past the red rep and the Jun 2013 reg date... and tell me exactly what was not valid with my evaluation.

Bailey · Jun 30, 2013

If Edwin, Stephen Etc seeing you asked

They wouldn't post.

I responded to your 'Blanket' IF YOU DON'T HOLD THE .CO.UK..../ NOBODY HOLDS.....

I haven't even had time - to find or look at your previous posts...

enough said, anyway you seem to have got the full red-rep you were after .... and you motives are probably justified, I'm sure they get read more times than than all the Greens put-together

Retired_Member42 · Jun 30, 2013

Scottm said:
Redemption being your minion doesn't bode well for him either imo.

He sends me the links on Skype and pays me £20k a post to respond in his defence. Times are hard. Needs must. I agree, he's a nob, but he's a mate, so what can you do?

retired_member29 · Jun 30, 2013

Monkey said:
Okay Scott, then feel free to post your own valuation of this domain, or poke holes in my attempt to.

Look past the red rep and the Jun 2013 reg date... and tell me exactly what was not valid with my evaluation.

Obviously I'm not in a position to value domains accurately when I'm new to domains, but not to life. My point being was how you seem to revel in your red bar controversial status and then all of a sudden expect people to believe what you say is trustworthy advice. Pretty simple stuff to understand for you i would of assumed.

Retired_Member38 · Jun 30, 2013

Whether the original poster chooses to take my advice on board or not is irrelevant - my point is that the Bailey clearly knows my post makes sense, yet because he's drunk he's deciding to argue the point just for the sake of it.