A NEW AGE: BRIDGING CREATIVITY, DOMAIN INVESTING AND SUCCESS

[WNC HOLDINGS]

A NEW AGE: BRIDGING CREATIVITY, DOMAIN INVESTING AND SUCCESS

Many of us are familiar with some of the most notable success stories in the realm of domain investing. Some of us find inspiration in how certain investors have gone years without seeing a profit before securing that one major sale that snowballed into others. It’s this very narrative that many investors leverage when providing sage advice to “newbies” about how domain investing is “hard work” and “isn’t for the faint of heart”.

By now, most of the domain investing world has sown into, and adopted, the idea that "domain investing success takes years", ".com will forever be king", "shorter is better" and "there are key metrics that dictate whether a domain has ANY value". This ideology is often endorsed by individuals that have been domain investing for a decade or more. Therefore, it’s fair to say the present domain investing culture is one they’ve helped facilitate in many ways.

As a new domain investing climate emerges, we’re seeing many seasoned investors doubling down on their views; and echoing their truth that "1-5 character .coms are the pinnacle of all domains”. It’s often implied that most alternative extensions are “worthless”; and any alternative naming systems/concepts stand no chance of mass-adoption. It seems this would make domain investing a static-pursuit at this point. Or is it really?

Whether many investors choose to acknowledge it or not, "now is the time of the creative”. There has never been a more lucrative time to be a polymath, embrace variety and experiment with different concepts and offerings. Now is the time to leverage creativity to sculpt narrative and build value. Especially considering the sheer number of ICANN gtlds and blockchain TLDs/SLDs that are poised to exist very soon.

In closing, it’s worth noting there’s more “flavor” coming into the domain investing sector. As with most things, there may be pushback on anything that appears to challenge the status quo of how the domain investing world "should" work. This isn’t to suggest the guidance of elder domain investors shouldn’t be heeded. It’s simply to say there will soon be new investors that will bridge a fresh perspective and creative approach with their accelerated success.

Share your constructive thoughts below.

WNC HOLDINGS

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

@Bob Hawkes

As someone who's a fixture within the domain investing space, what are your thoughts on the subject of this thread? We believe the domain space is noticeably evolving; but to what extent remains unclear.

How do you feel about the prospect of new investment styles coming into the fray and positively challenging the status quo for buying, selling and leveraging domains?

Do you believe domain investing can be a highly creative/lucrative pursuit without traveling the conventional path that many legacy investors endorse? (Especially with the rising interest in alternative naming systems.)

We'd appreciate your perspective. You've meaningfully contributed to the existing domain investor ecosystem; and we're genuinely interested to know what you think about the prospect of "change in the space".

Thank you in advance for both your time and willingness to engage in dialogue.

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[HotKey]

In a nutshell, what is the subject? I do like your post.

Some of us have been supporting and bringing new flavors to the table for years now. I believe there are some base criteria that remains, or should remain, constant over the years.

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

In a nutshell, what is the subject? I do like your post.

Some of us have been supporting and bringing new flavors to the table for years now. I believe there are some base criteria that remains, or should remain, constant over the years.

@HotKey,

We hope all is well. The subject is “evolving domain investing culture”. Times are changing; and we felt compelled to share some insights that would hopefully prompt both tenured and new investors to consider whether their current outlook, strategy and advice are based on “progressive principles” or “cemented bias”.

Best Regards,

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[DigiNames]

Domain investing always has and always will be evolving.

I would still say that .com is still king, shorter domains are better, etc., but a key component to investing in domains is trying to see what is next on the internet and in the world. I hold 95% .coms, but I have also invested in Handshake and blockchain domains, and other extensions such as .xyz.

Being stuck in your ways is definitely a bad thing when it comes to investing.

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

Domain investing always has and always will be evolving.

I would still say that .com is still king, shorter domains are better, etc., but a key component to investing in domains is trying to see what is next on the internet and in the world. I hold 95% .coms, but I have also invested in Handshake and blockchain domains, and other extensions such as .xyz.

Being stuck in your ways is definitely a bad thing when it comes to investing.

@DigiNames

We hope all is well. Thank you for taking the time to share your insights. You hit the proverbial nail on the head with “being stuck in your ways is definitely a bad thing when it comes to investing”. That was definitely one of the key messages in the post.

The fact you’ve diversified your investments signifies that you’re aware of where things are; and where they could very well be headed. Your written dialogue suggests that you have a preference; but you’re also open to new ideas and methods. Kudos to you!

We truly thank you for being an endorser of progressiveness; and wish you much success!

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[cooljub]

I'm getting déjà vu

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

I'm getting déjà vu

Maybe it’s our wishing everyone well at the onset of our responses AND thanking them for their insights at the end. We make it a point to acknowledge every person, every time. We also believe it’s warranted to convey gratitude for the time someone takes to post in a thread.

With this, we genuinely thank you. Hopefully we can gain more insight about the déjà vu you’re “getting”. We’re here for it if you’d like to share.

Best Regards,

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[cooljub]

Maybe it’s our wishing everyone well at the onset of our responses AND thanking them for their insights at the end. We make it a point to acknowledge every person, every time. We also believe it’s warranted to convey gratitude for the time someone takes to post in a thread.

Nope. Commendable

By now, most of the domain investing world has sown into, and adopted, the idea that "domain investing success takes years", ".com will forever be king", "shorter is better" and "there are key metrics that dictate whether a domain has ANY value".

True, things are evolving, but apart from a little vagary and inconsistency that makes this the game that it is, I'm wondering which of these is supposed to have changed.. again?

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

Nope. Commendable


True, things are evolving, but apart from a little vagary and inconsistency that makes this the game that it is, I'm wondering which of these is supposed to have changed.. again?

Greetings! We hope this reply finds you well. With regard to your inquiry, it really isn’t a matter of what’s “supposed” to change; but more of “how impending changes will impact the current domain investing culture”. To your point, domain investing has evolved a few times over since inception. However, the current evolution is introducing new, and more distinctive, variables.

The following are variables worth considering:

-Investing success will likely be accelerated thanks to technology etc.

-A new population is coming online; and this will likely translate into broader TLD preferences. Unless .com provides some higher level of “utility” than other TLDs, it stands to be dethroned so-to-speak in both rank and value.

-Shorter is better until.........some popular name or brand markets a “long” domain that people are actually willing to type in or voice-search. Long won’t be considered long in an era where voice-searching websites is popular. Phrase domains will be attractive; and not all of them will be short by character-count standards.

-With regard to the “standard metrics used to determine whether a domain has ANY value”, most of them are dated. All domains share a similar level of utility at this point. To say “.com” is worth more than “.coolstuff” might be true brand-wise until a community with staying power adopts .coolstuff and uses it for cool stuff.

The whole idea behind the post was to encourage tenured and new investors to consider how their strategy and outlook measures up to the obvious changes on the horizon. The goal wasn’t to attack the status quo of domain investing; but to critique it. As @DigiNames stated, “being stuck in your ways is definitely a bad thing when it comes to investing”. Some people feel conventional domain investing is becoming a stale game.

Well, at least the way it’s being played by most. Your thoughts?

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[cooljub]

A new population is coming online; and this will likely translate into broader TLD preferences.

And more diluted. I think the originals will have the prestige.

Shorter is better until.........some popular name or brand markets a “long” domain that people are actually willing to type in or voice-search. Long won’t be considered long in an era where voice-searching websites is popular. Phrase domains will be attractive; and not all of them will be short by character-count standards.

And even then the shorter ones will still be more memorable, so better. It's all relative.

With regard to the “standard metrics used to determine whether a domain has ANY value”, most of them are dated. All domains share a similar level of utility at this point. To say “.com” is worth more than “.coolstuff” might be true brand-wise until a community with staying power adopts .coolstuff and uses it for cool stuff.

And then buys coolstuff.com

The whole idea behind the post was to encourage tenured and new investors to consider how their strategy and outlook measures up to the obvious changes on the horizon. The goal wasn’t to attack the status quo of domain investing; but to critique it.

Sure, just what a discussion forum is for

 

[Bob Hawkes]

what are your thoughts on the subject of this thread? We believe the domain space is noticeably evolving; but to what extent remains unclear.

While the pace of change and innovation is less than many want, I think that innovations continue. Certainly some extensions that were seldom used have found acceptance, and how domain names are sold has also evolved to some degree. For example payment plans were rare just a few years ago, but now are common. Brandable marketplaces have only been part of the domain landscape for 15 years. Crowd sourced naming contests are much newer than that, and have changed the market.

Certainly there have been changes in naming trends over the years. What is popular as a brand now is different than 10 and 20 years ago.

On the broader issue of creativity and innovation, I think that will help drive us to excellence. There, in all fields, will be pushback to change. Part of that is just a cautious approach since much change will not catch on and be successful. Of course there is also the factor that some have a huge investment in what has been valued in past, and a radical change might threaten that.

I think we should be open to innovation and change, but also apply a critical approach (in the academic sense of critical) to changes.

Bob

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

And more diluted. I think the originals will have the prestige.

Maybe so. We shall see. (Smiles)

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

And even then the shorter ones will still be more memorable, so better. It's all relative.

It’s an understandable viewpoint. We definitely respect it. We shall see as time goes on.

And then buys coolstuff.com

Remember, everything is “rented” and can’t be “bought”. (No matter how many times you renew.) “And then RENTS coolstuff.com” seems fitting. (Smiles) Also, that’s the only one that could be rented. So a .coolstuff TLD would accommodate more people. Cooljub.coolstuff has more appeal right? (Smiles)

Sure, just what a discussion forum is for

Definitely! Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Iron sharpens iron. There definitely needs to be more constructive exchanges. We appreciate you.

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

While the pace of change and innovation is less than many want, I think that innovations continue. Certainly some extensions that were seldom used have found acceptance, and how domain names are sold has also evolved to some degree. For example payment plans were rare just a few years ago, but now are common. Brandable marketplaces have only been part of the domain landscape for 15 years. Crowd sourced naming contests are much newer than that, and have changed the market.

Certainly there have been changes in naming trends over the years. What is popular as a brand now is different than 10 and 20 years ago.

On the broader issue of creativity and innovation, I think that will help drive us to excellence. There, in all fields, will be pushback to change. Part of that is just a cautious approach since much change will not catch on and be successful. Of course there is also the factor that some have a huge investment in what has been valued in past, and a radical change might threaten that.

I think we should be open to innovation and change, but also apply a critical approach (in the academic sense of critical) to changes.

Bob

@Bob Hawkes

Thank you for being progressively insightful. We definitely agree with your viewpoint. You highlighted the “pace of innovation” and “investor cautiousness”. We’ve been assessing the level of both in the domain space for some time now; and feel the industry is void of a momentum it’s capable of having.

Now, there are a few different variables driving the lack of innovative momentum in the domain investing space. This is an entire subject for another time. However, we feel investors at all levels have an individual, and collective, power/duty to help propel things forward. This requires more creativity though.

There’s a lot of buy, hoard, sell and repeat with domains; which is similar to the never-ending cycle of wash, rinse and repeat. Many tenured investors SEEM to have biases rooted in their allegiance to older assets; making asset renewals “a glorified display of renter’s consistency”.

The goal of many home renters is to “own” one day. Domain investing involves continuous renting; and leveraging “time-committed” as equity. More creativity and innovation are needed in the domain space. Without them, tribalism becomes the industry’s sole anchor.

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[biggie]

Hi

i just let shit happen at it's own pace
as that has been the speed at which evolution has occurred in life and in domaining.

whenever a mo-fo tries to come on too fast, or too strong, they get push-back
whenever a mof-fo comes on too slow, they get left behind.

pace keeps pace, with time and space
and i just ride the waves and float along

you can be creative and swing to the side and possibly drown in the current
getting caught-up in your own predictions of what will be,
in the future...
if/when your ass "don't got" no history to consider,
with the past.

new age, new dot net, new uncentral, all new pyramids, versus > old ass .com

imo...

 

[HotKey]

Being stuck in your ways is not necessarily a bad thing, particularly when the status quo keels back and forth between various short-lived storms. And experienced investors have seen plenty of them, thus qualifying their trepidation. Been there, done that, type of thing.

The beauty of domaining lies in its opportunity in both areas; progressive principles and cemented bias.

I have always been a proponent of diversification, but for me it's finding a balance between proven results (hedging) and speculative engagement (exposure to risk). Because without having an open mind I think we lose a the natural sense of one of the rawest constants of domain names: the power and beauty of a proper address.

There are so many nuances to selling domains, and many are simply in it for the money, regardless of quality and progressive thinking. There are many domains that function simply as utility, aesthetics be damned. And they sell for thousands. A lot of these domains lie in the realm of quantifying their superlative existence simply because they are based on the aforementioned "proven results" or being "stuck in your ways". A good thing for many investors who have built up a portfolio over years or decades with this foundation, but not a good thing for new entrants looking to diversify.

Ultimately, to me, it comes down to only a few things: potential buyers/end users, fellow investor interest, and sensible foresight. Each of these can be exclusive of the other, but the domain name itself has to have a reason for living. Whatever your reason, I like what @biggie said:

you can be creative and swing to the side and possibly drown in the current
getting caught-up in your own predictions of what will be,
in the future...
if/when your ass "don't got" no history to consider,
with the past.

If you want to blaze a trail, don't be a mo-fo about it. Respect the old school, it's the foundation. And often what we turn to when that trail turns to mud.

-With regard to the “standard metrics used to determine whether a domain has ANY value”, most of them are dated. All domains share a similar level of utility at this point. To say “.com” is worth more than “.coolstuff” might be true brand-wise until a community with staying power adopts .coolstuff and uses it for cool stuff.

This is an excellent point, and I agree. Our old approach to defining value on new gTLDs, blockchain domains etc should be refined or overhauled. It will take years though. With dot-com, at least we have a constant. Being so embedded. I think the adoption rationale behind forward-type domains doesn't hold to what typical investors think will stand the test of time.

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

Being stuck in your ways is not necessarily a bad thing, particularly when the status quo keels back and forth between various short-lived storms. And experienced investors have seen plenty of them, thus qualifying their trepidation. Been there, done that, type of thing.

The beauty of domaining lies in its opportunity in both areas; progressive principles and cemented bias.

I have always been a proponent of diversification, but for me it's finding a balance between proven results (hedging) and speculative engagement (exposure to risk). Because without having an open mind I think we lose a the natural sense of one of the rawest constants of domain names: the power and beauty of a proper address.

There are so many nuances to selling domains, and many are simply in it for the money, regardless of quality and progressive thinking. There are many domains that function simply as utility, aesthetics be damned. And they sell for thousands. A lot of these domains lie in the realm of quantifying their superlative existence simply because they are based on the aforementioned "proven results" or being "stuck in your ways". A good thing for many investors who have built up a portfolio over years or decades with this foundation, but not a good thing for new entrants looking to diversify.

Ultimately, to me, it comes down to only a few things: potential buyers/end users, fellow investor interest, and sensible foresight. Each of these can be exclusive of the other, but the domain name itself has to have a reason for living. Whatever your reason, I like what @biggie said:



If you want to blaze a trail, don't be a mo-fo about it. Respect the old school, it's the foundation. And often what we turn to when that trail turns to mud.



This is an excellent point, and I agree. Our old approach to defining value on new gTLDs, blockchain domains etc should be refined or overhauled. It will take years though. With dot-com, at least we have a constant. Being so embedded. I think the adoption rationale behind forward-type domains doesn't hold to what typical investors think will stand the test of time.

@HotKey,

We hope all is well. You made great points and delivered them in a “balanced” fashion. Our intent when posting has always been to chip away at the zero-tolerance many investors have with strategies and preferences that don’t align with their own. It’s almost like many are being incentivized to portray themselves as “anti-evolution” and “anti-experimentation”.

Needless to say, belief in the .com was once ridiculed; but it became a phenomenon that many investors still reap a benefit from today. With there being more TLDs available, and more people coming online, there’s clearly an opportunity for other TLDs and investor strategies to rise and become lucrative. Many of which might not fit the current status quo.

We’re firm believers that investment practices and standards that are grandfathered in have value. We also know that creativity and being experimental serves as a bridge to innovation. We value the outlook and approach that many investors have/take; but we aren’t fond of their default shunning of new ideas and TLDs. In reality, it’s the shunning that fosters stagnation.

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[biggie]

There’s a lot of buy, hoard, sell and repeat with domains; which is similar to the never-ending cycle of wash, rinse and repeat. Many tenured investors SEEM to have biases rooted in their allegiance to older assets; making asset renewals “a glorified display of renter’s consistency”.

Hi

to me,
it sounds more like "hate"
because one either isn't a part of, or can't get into that cycle of "wash, rinse and repeat", which has been so successful in this "renter consistent market".

"age" of a domain, that comes from 'consistent renewal by registrants', leads to inherent/intrinsic value for thousands of domain names.
such names become assets, which go to the "wash, rinse and repeat" cycle.
this is where new entrants with money can "buy in" to the cycle and they can spin it in or cycle names out, to other buyers.

creativity comes at it's own pace from those with ideas who can put them into working products or services.

so, don't hate the game and don't hate the players, who play it well.
best you or anybody else can do, is start your own game and hope some sucker emc's follow along.
cuz... that's the only way you're going to "move the crowd".

don't talk about it, be about it.

imo....

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

Hi

to me,
it sounds more like "hate"
because one either isn't a part of, or can't get into that cycle of "wash, rinse and repeat", which has been so successful in this "renter consistent market".

"age" of a domain, that comes from 'consistent renewal by registrants', leads to inherent/intrinsic value for thousands of domain names.
such names become assets, which go to the "wash, rinse and repeat" cycle.
this is where new entrants with money can "buy in" to the cycle and they can spin it in or cycle names out, to other buyers.

creativity comes at it's own pace from those with ideas who can put them into working products or services.

so, don't hate the game and don't hate the players, who play it well.
best you or anybody else can do, is start your own game and hope some sucker emc's follow along.
cuz... that's the only way you're going to "move the crowd".

don't talk about it, be about it.

imo....

Nice tribal response! We don’t agree with the hate portion though. The world would be a much better place without hate. We support everyone. We’ve leveraged a few .com’s with IP/Concept packages that have been brokered/sold.

We don’t rely on the domain themselves though. You can never truly own a domain; but you can in fact own the IP and build out the concept. That’s the beauty of leveraging creativity and not just the idea of intrinsic value. That’s “being about it” right?

proofofmint.com is apart of an IP/Concept bundle we’re brokering the sale for. Check it out to get the gist of how we leverage domains. Before you do, be sure to click the downvote.

 

[dirk]

proofofmint.com is apart of an IP/Concept bundle we’re brokering the sale for.

That's not considered IP. Just a brainfart, pardon my french.

Edit: you claim to be brokering it... So who owns it?

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

That's not considered IP. Just a brainfart, pardon my french.

Edit: you claim to be brokering it... So who owns it?

Nice! “Brainfart”? That’s quite the interpretation. No need to pardon the class. (Smiles)

On a more serious note, all base-pages (or landers) for Concept Bundles simply provide a general overview of what’s included by design. It’s not a comprehensive list. The acquiring party also receives other services as well.

The Proofofmint Concept Bundle is suited for developers and startups in the blockchain space. It includes the centralized variations of proofofmint.com and .xyz; but also includes the scalable blockchain TLD .proofofmint as well.

In general, we specialize in pre-formatted concepts with customizable components. We have silent partnerships, offer private consults and provide other services by referral. We do “seasonally” broker IP sales and solicit clients.

Despite your inquiry leading with “brainfart”, we genuinely appreciate it. You’ve likely come across a philanthropic initiative or start-up our team has contributed to in a meaningful way. However, we’re prevented from disclosing asset owners, clients etc. Just know we have good intentions when we engage within this forum.

Best Regards,

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

 

[dirk]

Nice! “Brainfart”? That’s quite the interpretation. No need to pardon the class. (Smiles)

On a more serious note, all base-pages (or landers) for Concept Bundles simply provide a general overview of what’s included by design. It’s not a comprehensive list. The acquiring party also receives other services as well.

The Proofofmint Concept Bundle is suited for developers and startups in the blockchain space. It includes the centralized variations of proofofmint.com and .xyz; but also includes the scalable blockchain TLD .proofofmint as well.

In general, we specialize in pre-formatted concepts with customizable components. We have silent partnerships, offer private consults and provide other services by referral. We do “seasonally” broker IP sales and solicit clients.

Despite your inquiry leading with “brainfart”, we genuinely appreciate it. You’ve likely come across a philanthropic initiative or start-up our team has contributed to in a meaningful way. However, we’re prevented from disclosing asset owners, clients etc. Just know we have good intentions when we engage within this forum.

Best Regards,

Chris
WNC HOLDINGS

So basically you're just trying to sell a brainfart rather than representing someone who's trying to offload IP.

I read all this bullcrap and that's all it is. Just because you think of something doesn't meant it's considered IP.

There's nothing wrong with adding value to a brandable but the least you should do is get the basics right.

 

[WNC HOLDINGS]

So basically you're just trying to sell a brainfart rather than representing someone who's trying to offload IP.

I read all this bullcrap and that's all it is. Just because you think of something doesn't meant it's considered IP.

There's nothing wrong with adding value to a brandable but the least you should do is get the basics right.

Welp. The fact we didn’t run down the copyrights, trademarks and creative sources we leverage makes our response “bull crap”. Don’t worry. We didn’t mention patents because that’s not an area our team specializes in. We value your viewpoint regardless though. The .com-only investors tribe is likely grateful to have you as a member. It’s been a pleasure engaging with you. The downvote button is below if you need it.

 

[dirk]

Welp. The fact we didn’t run down the copyrights, trademarks and creative sources we leverage makes our response “bull crap”. Don’t worry. We didn’t mention patents because that’s not an area our team specializes in. We value your viewpoint regardless though. The .com-only investors tribe is likely grateful to have you as a member. It’s been a pleasure engaging with you. The downvote button is below if you need it.

Owning at tm, copyright, patent or whatever you have read about in some magazines has little to do with IP, regarding the case you brought up.

In case you failed to read between the lines, I'm not primarily a .com investor but I do endorse the '.com is king ' statement. There's no data showing otherwise.

Again, thank you guys (other chrisses?) for the invite but I'll pass.