Numeric Domains

Back in the Saddle (gently...)

See what happens when you stay away for so long...


DN Journal reports 2 four-digit numeric domain sales in its latest offering.


5652.com and 1925.com each sold for $2,500.

Has The Bottom Fallen Out?

Heyo,

Has the bottom truly fallen out on numeric domain sales or is this just a blip on the radar? The March 1 domain sales report from DNJournal would seem to indicate ... YES!!

34.com was reportedly sold for a paltry 45g's. That's a far cry from the over $340,000 that was fetched for 770.com, a THREE-digit domain, a while back.

The domain industry is in turmoil. It's not all bad news though. Toys.com just sold for over 5 million, Candy.com is reported selling for 3 million (+) and the impact of new extensions are causing controversy on the forum boards.

I'll weigh in more thoroughly next week.

Cheers,

Numeric Domains End the Year With a Bang!

DNJournal confirms that  T.J.Demas added to his formidable numeric domain war chest recently by adding "two bits" to the roster.

T.J. shelled out $124,555.55 for 25.com and promptly redirected it to this Wikipedia page.

It's still too early to tell if the elfin Aspenite will realize a profit on his numeric portfolio or not. Rest assured that Sluggo NuDoms here at number central won't be betting against him.

WSJ's Numbers Guy Zeros in on Numeric Domains

Nice to see more traditional mainstream media beginning to report increasingly on the growing phenomenon that are numeric domains. In a December 5, 2008 piece, among other observations, Carl Bialik skimmed the surface on recent top numeric domain sales (as oft reported here and at DN Journal).

"Industry watchers say Web users should get used to visiting sites whose names are numeric...The increase in Web navigation from cellphones adds to the trend, because on a numeric keypad, it's easier to type out a two-digit domain than a long word".

Hmmph... whoda thunk?

And it's not just the online WSJ's Bialik that's publicly singing the virtues of these numeric gems. Sedo's COO, Jeremiah Johnston adds "Every region of the world, no matter the culture, has some kind of tie to numerology".

Even the sluggos over at prestigious Wharton, specifically one perfesser Eric T. Bradlow , weighs in with his Harvard backed PhD to opine... "I do think you will see a movement toward numerically named Web sites. They have this perception of technology and newness."

We couldn't agree more. Nudoms are invited to contact Mr. Bialik at his blog.

85 33627 Gets $ymmetrical for $1.14 million

Heyo,

Long time, no yak. I hope you’ve all had an exceptional summer thus far.

Astute NuDoms will know that it’s been over a month since I last posted. There are several reasons for this, not the least of which there has been little to report regarding numeric domains. However, and more importantly, we have spent the last 4 months working on a project designed to take numeric domains from under the radar and into the stratosphere. But as you’ll read here and elsewhere, others are also bursting at the seams (and wallets) in an effort to get their numeric domain projects up and running.

Picture credits: Peter McMullen and John Steinbridge

I was ecstatic to read in Ron Jackson’s DNJournal, the number$ behind the numbers as T.J. Demas dipped into his piggy bank for over US $1.1 million for a handful of (mostly) numeric domains. Who knows what drives a person to shell out substantial (and to-the-penny) amounts of money for seemingly innocuous numeric domains. Far be it for us to weigh on the possibilities. Suffice to say that we’re ecstatic that this news has come to light.

A quick look at the current landing pages that some of these numeric domains are pointed to might lead one to believe that the elfish TJ:

• Was once chastised for being late

• Has a fetish for kaleidoscopic drawings of colorful little rocks

• Doesn’t want to miss the next Olympiad, or as is more likely the case...
  

• Knows a thing or two about a thing or two

No doubt there is a great deal more to this story that will be disclosed in due course. Whatever route TJ takes we wish him well.

The over $180k paid for any one of these domains does not compare to the over $343k paid for 770.com awhile back. It just goes to show how difficult it is to determine the value numeric domains. Aside from the symmetric and symbolic connections between the prices paid for these domains, Marchex et. al. saw the value in selling at those prices or we would not be reading about it now.

I can say with certainty that the sluggos here at ND are more bullish than ever on numeric domains and look forward to a kick-ass Q4/08 and 2009.

Edit August 22 - Click "comments" below to add your comment.

246.com Tops $124k

DNJournal reports that 246.com recently changed hands for $124,568.

That Ain't Hay

If there was any question that pure numeric domains are continuing to sky rocket in price, this little nugget oughta help quell those nasty rumors.

I'm often asked by fellow NuDoms...

    "Scott, what do you think this (insert numeric domain) is worth?"

Much to their disappointment, I invariably always give the same answer:

    "your domain is worth exactly the amount that a buyer is prepared to write a cheque (check) for." (that clears the bank ;-)

Who knows what motivates buyers to unleash the purse strings when it comes to their domain fantasies?

Here's another example of a company that understands the value and importance of a numeric domain and dipped deep into the piggy bank to back up their visions of sugar plums.

Ron Jackson, all things Poobah at DNJournal reports today that the pure numeric domain 770.com traded hands for eye-popping sum of $343,208.

European online gaming operator Casino770 coughed up the coin to secure their prize.

I know there will be those doubting Thomas' that will chirp ... "yeah, but it was their name, they had to buy it". That may well be the case, and I'm not privy to the details of this deal, but look at these 2 sides of the coin.

1) The owners of Casino770 should maybe have given a little more thought to acquiring the numeric domain long before they created the moniker. After all, there are still a very few 3-digit .com numeric domains available on the open market trading for somewhat less than 300 grand. Not thinking this through was their opportunity cost that eventually nicked them for significantly more than they might have otherwise paid.

2) Kudos to the NuDom that owned the domain. Was he just lucky to have stumbled onto this domain? Did he hand reg it? Did he solicit a previous owner to buy it?  Who knows?  Who cares?

The fact is, he knew exactly how much $$$,$$$ it would take to effect an ownership change at Whois . More importantly, he had the cajones to stick to his guns until he got exactly how much he wanted.

The sluggos here at Numeric Domains salute both the buyer and seller in this transaction. We urge all companies and organizations looking to expand the depth and breadth of their product and service offerings to strongly consider incorporating numeric domains into their plans.

Opportunity knocks...   

Can iLightning Strike Twice? iReport Added to Free Celebrity Giveaway!

In a related post, below, I offered several celebrities and high-profile organizations their numeric domain for free. I'm pleased to announce a late entry to the field.

Ten years from now, some people will perhaps look back at this post and have an opinion. If they do, I suspect most views will be situate in the “eh, …whatever, who cares” middle ground. But if I know Domainers, and more specifically NuDoms (Numeric Domainers), some opinions will be firmly entrenched at the poles, either:

1. He GAVE that domain away? For FREE? What a/n idiot, putz, bonehead, friggin’ newb (add your own expletive), or

2. He GAVE that domain away? For FREE? Wow! (again, add your own)

WHY?

Like many Domainers, I look to my more esteemed peers (Ham, Schilling, Ye, Ostrofsky, Zappy etc) for ideas, experience, knowledge, guidance, inspiration (ok, that’s enough brown nosing, ed.). In this case, the guru of choice, not surprisingly, is Rick Schwartz. It’s the self-proclaimed “Domain King” for a number of reasons. (many of which can be found on his blog http://www.ricksblog.com). Rick advocates:

   * Domain appraisals are ALL worthless

   * You advertise NOW

   * We are all self-appointed

   * Follow the money

   * People called me a fool

   * Circumstance drives deals, and…

   * He sold iReport.com for $750,000

My objective is crystal clear. I aim to raise the awareness of the use and utility of numeric domains, to help to enable their use and ultimately to raise the value of numeric domains across the board. In a recent, well publicized sale…

CNN was sufficiently prepared to:

   * Commit the time and people to negotiate for months

   * Spend 750k to buy iReport.com and:

   * Launch a Web site dedicated to “uncensored, user-powered news”,

Maybe CNN is prepared to:

   * negotiate for a few hours

   * spend $0.00 for the numeric domain equivalent for iReport (4737678.com) and,

   * run a parallel wireless Web site specifically formatted for cell phone and other mobile device access - and worldwide delivery of “uncensored, user-powered news”

Maybe they’ll get it. Maybe they won’t.

I guess it really depends on CNN’s/iReports view of what the Domain King describes as “circumstance”.

Mainstream Media Gettin' With the Plan?

Mainstream media are slowly coming around to understanding the value of Internet domain names. Senior Fortune Magazine scribe Paul Sloan has been reporting on the domain industry for a few years now and in his latest piece, he speaks from experience as he was a participating panelist at the recent DOMAINfest global conference in Hollywood, CA.

Photo courtesy of DNJournal

 

Are domain names recession-proof?

By Paul Sloan

Global markets are in a state of panic. Credit markets are all but closed. And recession fears are everywhere. But at the conference I attended in Hollywood this week, called DomainFest, you’d have little clue that the financial world was melting down.

The domain world - the people that buy and sell names and make money from pay-per-click ads on their websites - is booming. Downturn? Bring it on.

DomainFest is put on by Oversee.net, a private LA-based company that’s been around since 2000 and has been profitable since day one. Its businesses: managing its own domain portfolio of 700,000 names; running domain name auctions; and using technology to match ads from Google (GOOG) and elsewhere to other people’s domains.

Just last week, Oversee snagged a $150 million investment from Oak Hill Capital, the Silicon Valley private equity firm started by Robert M. Bass of Bass brothers fame. It’s the first time Oversee, with 2007 revenues of more than $200,000, has taken any outside money, and the bet shows huge confidence in the oft-misunderstood domain name industry.

Domain names continue to sell for eye-popping prices. No blockbusters sold at the conference’s live auctions, but all told people plunked down $3.2 million for names. Bookmarks.com fetched $300,000. Photograph.com went for $195,000. Yemen.com: $100,000. And Porn.net sold for $400,000, which seems like a bargain considering that last year Porn.com sold for $9.5 million - in cash.

But the excitement about domain name prices isn’t what’s bringing investors like Oak Hill into the business. It’s the ability a good name has to draw high quality traffic for advertisers. Domain names, often talked about as the real estate of the Web, offer an incredible profit opportunity as more of the world - and more ad money -moves online.

The way most of these sites make money is through what’s known as direct navigation. That’s the term for when someone bypasses the search engine box and instead types a query directly into the address bar. (Shameless plug: An overview of this is in a piece I wrote in 2005, called Masters of Their Domains.)

Someone types in, say, Dreamvacations.com, which is run by Oversee.net. A page pops with a number of categories, such as “all inclusive,” “cruise vacation” and “Disney vacation.” A vacation hunter clicking through is met with a number of sponsored results - relevant ads for each topic. Click on one of those and the advertisers pays a fee – part goes to the ad provider (generally Google) and part goes to Oversee and the domain owner.

A top name - one for, say, a product like digital cameras or vacation packages - attracts the sort of shoppers advertisers want: People essentially raising their hand and saying here’s exactly what I want to buy. As a result, argues Lawrence Ng, the 29-year-old co-founder and CEO of Oversee, “The return on investment for advertisers can be as good as or better than it is for search.”

And because such advertising, known as pay-per-click, is so measurable, much of it should remain strong during a downturn. Oak Hill, in fact, did a study that found that direct advertising has held up far better during bad times than less measurable forms of advertising (think big brand building TV ads and magazine spreads). And pay-per-click ads on websites are the Internet equivalent of direct advertising. “All the data to date shows this is really valuable traffic,” says Robert Morse, a partner at Oak Hill Capital Partners.

Does that mean we should all run out and buy domain names and pack ‘em with ads? Not so fast. Kevin Heisler, the executive editor of Search Engine Watch, has studied the domain world and concludes that when you look at the millions of domain names out there trying to make money from pay-per-click ads, the return on investment from straightforward paid search is better. The top tier domain names are the exception, he says, not the rule. And that explains why some domain names easily fetch six and seven figure sums, even in a down market.