Thanks for your reply. I was addressing the aspect that in xyz these auction prices are different from the announced retail sales, pointing out same could be said in another extension. Just browse the NamePros completed sales thread and tons of examples with big difference between acquisition and final prices.
The other points made earlier I agree with, of course. I presume most or all of the names in the OP list carry a premium renewal. That means that it is hard to make the economics work as a domain investor, so they will sell over and over wholesale at not that much different than renewal price probably. I believe only 1 of Swetha's huge portfolio carry a premium renewal.
Also, I agree with those who earlier pointed out that there is also a difference in the type of names that are selling in xyz at end user prices are in vast majority of cases not product/service match names but rather a bit less common words that would make a good brand for a web3 startup. This was the one point that most struck me when I analyzed the XYZ retail sales data.
The ENS integration that .xyz got in early gave the extension a leg up on other extensions in the emerging web3 world. Now many other TLDs, including com, can be similarly integrated, but the advantage seems to carry over now that people have seen web3 companies on xyz.
On the Sav auctions people are buying a lot of exact match type names, and some brandable type names, I presume hoping that the market for xyz will broaden. We will have to wait and see if that happens.
Anyway the relevance I saw was to stress that
acquisition and selling prices are different in any extension. Therefore disagree with OP that something is wrong.
It is okay if not everyone agrees there is relevance. I would have to check, but I think I have now and then seen some posts on NamePros that I personally did not see as relevant to the topic.
Bob