Question for ND

domaingenius · Jun 14, 2006

Hello

I would be interested to know whether ND would tell publicly or otherwise what percentage of revenue from Google is passed over to clients ?.
Let me be honest in saying that I think that in the long run I think it unsustainable to take the position of saying it is confidential.
I am asking Sedo the same question and lets see their reaction. I have been in business a good number of years and have never yet known a company not wish to say what they are taking and hope that this may open up the matter to debate . I am quite happy if someone says "Yes we take 25% " but when someone says "sorry we cannot tell you" one wonders why (and I am not saying that you have said that) ?.

Hope you dont take offence but is intended as serious question,

Regards

DG

NameDriver · Jun 14, 2006

Hi there DG,

I appreciate your need for clarification on this and it is a tricky sitution to be in. The reasons we don't reveal it is something I think I have gone through before. I've posted my answer which I posted some time ago on another board.

Our main issue is simply that each company counts views, clicks etc so differently that saying that we pay at XX% is really just a number plucked from pretty much nowhere and shouldn't be used to judge a company. We believe that service, high earnings and an innovative system is what we should be judged on. Domain parking is not like going to a HMV or Virgin and buying a CD where you can directly compare prices for the same product. If company X say they pay out at 80% and company Y at 70%, then it looks like 'hey, I should go to company X'.
However, what happens if Google are giving X 60% of their gross revenue and giving Y 70%. So it looks like X has the cheaper CDs but Y is actually receiving a CD with an extra track on the playlist, so you end up receiving more from Y in the end.
I appreciate that not giving an answer to what seems to be a straight question does look like we're trying to squirm but I really strongly believe that companies who do bleat about their revenue share are trying to cover up the fact that they actually pay less. I'd rather have 70% of $1 than 85% of $0.50. As a result of the smokescreen put up by others, we never use revenue share as a bargaining tool because we don't want that to be a factor in any customer's decision.
I can only say that we started in September at a high rev share. In the first week, we bumped that share up another 10%. At this stage, I honestly believe we do pay out at least as high as anyone else. We work extremely efficiently and have very low overheads. None of us are greedy and realise the need to keep you guys happy because without you there is no us.

I feel like a Blair spin doctor, but I can assure you that we are trying to be as cleancut as possible here in an industry where people always feel they're being scammed by the likes of us. Our conscience is very clear and I think the high earnings we pay out to you guys proves this.

Ed

Answer from another forum:

1. For our own protection: There are several Google syndications now and we don't want to declare to the world 'we are paying XX% revenue share' as it gives them an easy handle to see exactly just why we are beating them...

2. What exactly is a 90% revenue share? You see companies saying 'We'll pay out 90%, 85%, 95% revenue share. But that's a percentage of what exactly? Every parking company counts views, clicks etc differently. Some chuck away 50% of your clicks, some hit Google but don't hit your account, some show double the traffic of others, some keep a percentage of revenue for themselves before it even gets round to 'sharing' the rev upfront etc. We feel our views/clicks model is extremely accurate in terms of what Google also maps and therefore our high revenue share will make people better off in the long run.

3. We're not going to make any promises we can't keep. We feel that it's impossible to operate when paying out, for example 95% revenue share, so if someone's offering that, go to them and come to us when they go bust...

We want to be transparent, fair and highly competitive and will always be open on every issue. However, I feel revenue share is a smokescreen thrown up by some other companies to deflect away from the fact that you are simply earning less. We believe we pay more: If we don't, people take their names away. It's as simple as that.

domaingenius · Jun 14, 2006

I do hope im not "blackballed" for speaking up,lol. I note what you say and agree that if you have different formulas then it would be hard to say percentage wise, but you must have the total figures received from Google for each seperate client so how about giving each client a brakdown such as simply;

Google : $2000
less our fees $1900 )lol, I jest a bit)
You Get $ 100

That would be straight and to the point and only thing I could think would hold you back would be not wishing to make some think they were paying too much to "you". As I say I am not knocking what you earn because I simply dont know what you earn,

Regards

DG

NameDriver · Jun 14, 2006

The problem with that is that it is essentially the same thing.

'We pay out at 90%' = 'We pay out 900 of 1000'
Google gives X 1000, they pay out 900, Google gives Y 1100, they give you 900. A lower percentage, but the same thing.

I know that I'm fobbing this off. I know it's a simple answer but I also know it is essentially a futile comparison. On a certain Pro program it says 'your bonus level XX%'. Of what? Of the rev share you already have? 30% extra revenue share or 30% of the percentage revenue share? If we put 30% extra on top of what we pay out, we'd go out of business faster than Enron.
It is simply an argument we don't want to enter as we feel that there is no method of comparing one company's view of revenue share with another one. This is why we stress earnings, earnings, earnings. This is what mattes at the end of the day, not what percentage some company claims to pay out from what they claim to receive from their advertising partner.

As I said, this is not 'hiding' because we don't want to be transparent, we want to focus on the aspects which can be used to judge different companies rather than the factors which the companies themselves like to use to coax people while pocketing more themselves.

Ed

olebean · Jun 14, 2006

domaingenius said:
I do hope im not "blackballed" for speaking up,lol. I note what you say and agree that if you have different formulas then it would be hard to say percentage wise, but you must have the total figures received from Google for each seperate client so how about giving each client a brakdown such as simply;

Google : $2000
less our fees $1900 )lol, I jest a bit)
You Get $ 100

That would be straight and to the point and only thing I could think would hold you back would be not wishing to make some think they were paying too much to "you". As I say I am not knocking what you earn because I simply dont know what you earn,

Regards

DG

DG

With my "accounts" head on...

Any plausible scenario has generically flawed answers based on criteria already given. Even using any description an of average and forecasting opens a mind field of spurious answers.

Let alone both parties being business and not wanting to give away their data... If they are limited that would be a different issue

As for being backballed, I think the only way that could happen is a brush and paint or just dipping in paint (or ink)..

domaingenius · Jun 14, 2006

olebean said:
DG

With my "accounts" head on...

Any plausible scenario has generically flawed answers based on criteria already given. Even using any description an of average and forecasting opens a mind field of spurious answers.

Let alone both parties being business and not wanting to give away their data... If they are limited that would be a different issue

As for being backballed, I think the only way that could happen is a brush and paint or just dipping in paint (or ink)..

Agreed.I should like to make clear that I am not in anyway unhappy with NameDrive and indeed find them professional and good to work with, and indeed the money generated is good. All I was looking to do was make comparisons to see options but clearly thats not as easy as I thought,
i.e. obviously 75% of £100 is better than 80% of £75. Anyway i'll sleep on it.
DG

NameDriver · Jun 14, 2006

Hi OB and DG,

It really is the case that the competition plays a part in what we reveal and what we don't. It is also a fact that what some of the competition reveal is not necessarily the whole picture so we don't want to mix anything in with that.

As far as I'm aware, the only member of this board being blackballed is aqls. I believe he even asked for it at some point in January

Ed