Hi @Bob Hawkes,
Thanks for sharing the essential information. It will be helpful to me.
Thanks to those who have shared a domain presentation example, would love to see some more examples shared in this thread. We can all learn from great examples.
Bob...thanks for everything. About nine months ago Eric Lyon and I were discussing taglines/slogans and here's what he said about a domain that I own BrandWik.com"
"A tagline/slogan is not always needed but is a great asset to have for your PR/Marketing message that helps the consumer translate, relate, or digest the purpose/usage of the brand.
The tagline/slogan will depend on the direction you take it.
BrandWik - Igniting your creative desires - A brand consulting agency building brands from the ground up
BrandWik - Branding Strategies Defined - A Wikipedia of brands, why they chose them, how they marketed them, and the strategies they used to make them successful.
There are many other creative ways the brand can go, but that should give an idea.
Good luck with it."
I sell domains in my language on a local forum. My last sell was a translation of modernbazaar com whish is a great domain but people seem always want to see something else rather than plain text sale auction so i put a good bazaar logo in sale, added keyword search statistics and a few ideas how they use the domain on their projects. It definitely changed something on their mind. Merchandise quality is important but the presentation is everything.
there is no perfect answer. Presentation is domain subjective. If we are talking about made-up names - presentation/logo/description/domain uses like what we see on SH, BB, BP helps the buyer in making an informed decision.
For names that are dictionary-based or are on regular use may or may not need the presentation stuff. Because It can sell itself just with a 'for sale banner'. Because - businesses are looking for that term.
presentation is developer stuff, not domainer stuff
that said, check out landio.icu
the bulk of my names now re-direct
only have a couple landers left...
Presentation is sales stuff, so if domaining is about sales to any degree, presentation is domainer stuff. IMO.
Search engines and URLs are not aware of design or beauty.
A good name sells irrespective of presentation.
Presentation may be of value for poorer quality names when displayed in a 'shop window' list being browsed by the average Joe. SEO becomes important in this category.
I don't think the average "end user" knows what you refer to as a "good" domain when he/she see's one, and I'm not so sure you or I do either. Beauty really is in the eyes of the beholder
Look at how naming works. Example: A Linkedin marketer named Shay Rowbottom is all over my Linkedin feed. If her profile was ”Linkedin Marketer” she would drown. She has hammered her name in, now her business is her, not keywords.
This is also how the main business naming conventions work. Uniqueness, distinctivity. This allows you to be found and to have a brand. It’s actually the average joe mom & pops that thinks that ”JeansPants” is a good name for selling jeans. It’s an anomaly caused by a SEO advantage that no longer exists. As for type in, it still happens, but for very few names that used to have it, and it’s dwindling.
”So who’s bad”?
If a logo is not useful, the name is not a business name, and if it’s not a business name, I’m out. Tried the dried out bland keyword route 10 years ago.
There was once a brand in Sweden that used generic names for their products. Toothpaste was named ”toothpaste”. Coffee was named ”Coffee”. The styles where all the same. Not in existance today. They were cheap and of pretty good quality. The issue was the outdated branding.
Search has been heavily geared towards ”brands”.
The purpose of search engines is not evaluation of beauty or design. People do that just fine. (People create the data that search engines feed on).
And search won’t be dumbing down, it will be taking leaps.
Bob was specifically asking about selling domain names based on "... whether the presentation of the domain name influences the chance of a sale, or the likely selling price."
The two examples you mentioned - 'toothpaste' and 'Coffee' - would sell for extremely high prices if they were dot com names, without logos or branding or marketing, and that was the point I was making.
I am also discussing the topic.
Those examples are also anomalies. You said ”good names”. Those are exceptional.
What percentage of domain investors have those kinds of names? I’m talking about the big picture. I think it’s more fruitful.
Also - none of those are conceptually versatile like say ’Apple’. You would be restricted to Coffee or Toothpaste and you would struggle to make it a brand. Booking dotcom made it at the expense of $$$$$$$, but they are a legally pretty unenforcable brand right now.
There is a reason that big brands are not generic keywords.
There are 2 main gravity centers in domain name preference. The small one is shrinking and the big one is growing. Overlaps are always interesting.
(Not indicative of anything but my general point about brand name VS generic)
There is a reason for this too (Thanks Shane Cultra)
I think it’s the other way around though. Brandbucket for sales pages are looking like Mark Cuban’s investments.
Separate names with a comma.