IT.COM

sales Brandable sales stats

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

rubencouto

DN FrontTop Member
Impact
8,062
Hello!

Using the info made available by @Dnbolt at his website and with is permission, I put together a table with some stats on brandable sales (Brandbucket - July 2016).
I would like to get your feedback on it. Is it useful? Is it relevant? What should I change? What should I add? Please feel free to provide any feedback! :)

Here is the table: www.hdname.com/portfolio/blog/files/brandbucket_jul_2016.pdf

Thank you!
 
14
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
I like the table format almost looks similar to my D.I.D
 
1
•••
Interesting chart... To me the more info the better, so it is appreciated.

My comments/suggestions:

I would also release a chart containing at least the last 3 months of sales worth of data. This would create more accurate metrics.

I would modify the "Domain Build" table to:
Keyword
Keyword + suffix
prefix + Keyword
Invented

This would give a much more in depth look at the different types of sales.

Under the first table on the left - Keywords seem to be mostly blank (n/a) This makes the table pretty useless. Is this because there was no commonality in the sales? Would love to see this filled out and possibly even go a few more levels.

Are the modified beginning and ending always only two letters? If so I think this might be leaving some important information out. A invented suffix or prefix could be 3 or even (but unlikely) more.

Just a few ideas for you... I look forward to any future stats/charts you release.
 
4
•••
Interesting chart... To me the more info the better, so it is appreciated.

My comments/suggestions:

I would also release a chart containing at least the last 3 months of sales worth of data. This would create more accurate metrics.

I would modify the "Domain Build" table to:
Keyword
Keyword + suffix
prefix + Keyword
Invented

This would give a much more in depth look at the different types of sales.

Under the first table on the left - Keywords seem to be mostly blank (n/a) This makes the table pretty useless. Is this because there was no commonality in the sales? Would love to see this filled out and possibly even go a few more levels.

Are the modified beginning and ending always only two letters? If so I think this might be leaving some important information out. A invented suffix or prefix could be 3 or even (but unlikely) more.

Just a few ideas for you... I look forward to any future stats/charts you release.
Hello @Michael M !

These are great inputs!!

Do you think a three month sales table would be more relevant than a monthly one?

I will work on the spreadsheet to see if I can follow your suggestions, in order to enrich the table.

In fact the first table on the left is blank because I found no repeating first keywords within the 81 sold domains...

As for the prefix + keyword and keyword + sufix, could you help me out to find out how would the following examples be categorized )not being a native english speaker doesn't help :)) :

capsulo.com: woud this be an invented or keyword + sufix (capsul from capsule + o)?
askademic.com: invented, keyword + sufix (ask + ademic) or two keyword (ask + academic)?
temptt.com: invented (typo) or Keyword + sufix (tempt + t)?
virtuscape.com: Invented, prefix + sufix (virtu + scape) or two keyword (virtual + escape)?

All input will be most appreciated!

Thanks!
 
0
•••
Hello @Michael M !

These are great inputs!!

Do you think a three month sales table would be more relevant than a monthly one?

I will work on the spreadsheet to see if I can follow your suggestions, in order to enrich the table.

In fact the first table on the left is blank because I found no repeating first keywords within the 81 sold domains...

As for the prefix + keyword and keyword + sufix, could you help me out to find out how would the following examples be categorized )not being a native english speaker doesn't help :)) :

capsulo.com: woud this be an invented or keyword + sufix (capsul from capsule + o)?
askademic.com: invented, keyword + sufix (ask + ademic) or two keyword (ask + academic)?
temptt.com: invented (typo) or Keyword + sufix (tempt + t)?
virtuscape.com: Invented, prefix + sufix (virtu + scape) or two keyword (virtual + escape)?

All input will be most appreciated!

Thanks!

I think the three month sales chart will provide more data points therefore would show current trends better than a one month chart. Though I can see the use for both.

There most probably would be more keyword matches for the first table in a 3 month chart.

Categorizing is where things do get a bit complicated. (I'm sure even more so for a non-native English speaker). Honestly this would be entirely up to you as the author - everyone would see it a little bit differently.

Are you doing this by hand or are you using an algorithm? The human eye can pick up on the difference a lot easier than AI, though you could get close with some fine tuning...

In either case I personally would categorize those names in the following manner:

Capsulo - Would fall into the invented name category because it does not contain the full word. A human eye might categorize this as a keyword domain, but the missing letter, to me, makes it invented.

Askademic - Once again this is not simple, but I would classify it as Keyword + Suffix. Or there would need to be a new category created for "Word blend" (or similar)

Temptt - This is a new category that has emerged, a strategic typo. If you could capture this category as well it would definitely help.

VirtuScape - I would classify this as a Prefix + Keyword.

Basically I would go by the dictionary. If the two words could not be separated and still found in the dictionary then it would be one of the other categories.

But everyone is going to have their own opinion on how to break out the categories. You could possibly include the methods you use in a link so those of us interested at looking deep could understand your methodology.
 
1
•••
I think the three month sales chart will provide more data points therefore would show current trends better than a one month chart. Though I can see the use for both.

There most probably would be more keyword matches for the first table in a 3 month chart.

Categorizing is where things do get a bit complicated. (I'm sure even more so for a non-native English speaker). Honestly this would be entirely up to you as the author - everyone would see it a little bit differently.

Are you doing this by hand or are you using an algorithm? The human eye can pick up on the difference a lot easier than AI, though you could get close with some fine tuning...

In either case I personally would categorize those names in the following manner:

Capsulo - Would fall into the invented name category because it does not contain the full word. A human eye might categorize this as a keyword domain, but the missing letter, to me, makes it invented.

Askademic - Once again this is not simple, but I would classify it as Keyword + Suffix. Or there would need to be a new category created for "Word blend" (or similar)

Temptt - This is a new category that has emerged, a strategic typo. If you could capture this category as well it would definitely help.

VirtuScape - I would classify this as a Prefix + Keyword.

Basically I would go by the dictionary. If the two words could not be separated and still found in the dictionary then it would be one of the other categories.

But everyone is going to have their own opinion on how to break out the categories. You could possibly include the methods you use in a link so those of us interested at looking deep could understand your methodology.
Hello!

This is really helpful to me!
I'm using Excel with a few formulas, but the "initial" work of figuring out the keywords, prefixes and sufixes is manual... Hence my handicap with the language...

I'm going back to the drawing board with these inputs and come back here as soon as I have some progress.

Thank you so much for your feedback!
 
0
•••
Hello @Michael M !

These are great inputs!!

Do you think a three month sales table would be more relevant than a monthly one?

I will work on the spreadsheet to see if I can follow your suggestions, in order to enrich the table.

In fact the first table on the left is blank because I found no repeating first keywords within the 81 sold domains...

As for the prefix + keyword and keyword + sufix, could you help me out to find out how would the following examples be categorized )not being a native english speaker doesn't help :)) :

capsulo.com: woud this be an invented or keyword + sufix (capsul from capsule + o)?
askademic.com: invented, keyword + sufix (ask + ademic) or two keyword (ask + academic)?
temptt.com: invented (typo) or Keyword + sufix (tempt + t)?
virtuscape.com: Invented, prefix + sufix (virtu + scape) or two keyword (virtual + escape)?

All input will be most appreciated!

Thanks!

Nice info.

If you can pull any form of word out of the first 2-5 letters then it's keyword based. The whole keyword does not have to be there to be a keyword based name. Don't go by what the BrandBucket newsletter says because their stats are totally wrong. They don't know how to place keyword or partial keyword based sales in their respective categories. Most of the sales that occur at BB are keyword or partial keyword based.

The letter frequency chart is a bit useless since vowels A E I O U will always be the highest amount most of the time.

I would also never include any 4 letter sales because they always skew the numbers and make the stats not useful when they are included. The sale of Dany.com at $65,000 totally messed up all the stats. The average sales price of domains over 6 years old was $6,163.21 which sounds amazing but if you don't include the Dany.com sale it would probably be half that number so the actual stat becomes useless. There were only 5 four letter sales in July which is only 6% of the total volume so not including them makes sense to get a much more usable stat. You should never include any sales that are total outliers. A $50,000 sale thrown in with a bunch of $2,000 sales will render all the stats useless.

You should make the categories completely invented names, partial keyword based names ,and unaltered keyword names.

Another stat that you should include is all sales that are 2 years old or less. Many with BrandBucket and their most avid followers say that aged domains are better sellers. It makes sense until you realize that 40 out of the 81 sales or 50% were handregs that are less than 2 years old. Never underestimate handregs. :)

You should stick to a one month table to keep it more relevant but it would be nice to see a table for the past months also.

Every bit of brandable info is useful. Thanks for taking the time to do this.
 
2
•••
Nice info.

If you can pull any form of word out of the first 2-5 letters then it's keyword based. The whole keyword does not have to be there to be a keyword based name. Don't go by what the BrandBucket newsletter says because their stats are totally wrong. They don't know how to place keyword or partial keyword based sales in their respective categories. Most of the sales that occur at BB are keyword or partial keyword based.

The letter frequency chart is a bit useless since vowels A E I O U will always be the highest amount most of the time.

I would also never include any 4 letter sales because they always skew the numbers and make the stats not useful when they are included. The sale of Dany.com at $65,000 totally messed up all the stats. The average sales price of domains over 6 years old was $6,163.21 which sounds amazing but if you don't include the Dany.com sale it would probably be half that number so the actual stat becomes useless. There were only 5 four letter sales in July which is only 6% of the total volume so not including them makes sense to get a much more usable stat. You should never include any sales that are total outliers. A $50,000 sale thrown in with a bunch of $2,000 sales will render all the stats useless.

You should make the categories completely invented names, partial keyword based names ,and unaltered keyword names.

Another stat that you should include is all sales that are 2 years old or less. Many with BrandBucket and their most avid followers say that aged domains are better sellers. It makes sense until you realize that 40 out of the 81 sales or 50% were handregs that are less than 2 years old. Never underestimate handregs. :)

You should stick to a one month table to keep it more relevant but it would be nice to see a table for the past months also.

Every bit of brandable info is useful. Thanks for taking the time to do this.
Hello!

Thank you for taking the time to provide such useful and relevant points!
The issue with with the 4L.com is really a problem, as far as stats are concerned. I must take a deeper look into it and create a separated category or remove them all together...

I will also look into the letter frequency. The vowels issue is another good point.

And the categories suggestion seems to me like a good idea.

I'll work on these!

Thanks for the input!
 
0
•••
wundervart ...keep up the good work
 
1
•••
Thanks for the good work

I also vote for longer period, ideally: since origin of time or at least 3 months.

I'd also remove 4L that pollute the stats

Keyword categorization is an issue. It's really the perception by an end user that counts. For example askademic would immediately be 'translated' into ask academic and could be categorized in 'almost keyword' category rather than invented. I would reserve the terms keyword+suffix and prefix+keyword to their strict definition to avoid confusion.

In many cases, a search in google will help you define in what category put a keyword

Most likely a given domain could (and should) fall in several categories

For me, I'd prefer the raw data in the form of a multi column spreadhseet (eg: domain/price/DateCreated or age/Invented/keyword+suffix etc...) that would allow me to pull my own statistics.

I am not too sure that the first/last letters are statistically relevant for such small numbers. And in any case, they are not relevant for anything that can be related to a keyword. For example, askademic would add a 'c' in the count of the last letters but the 'c' is really accidental and does not correspond to a 'prefered sound' in the english language (at least IMHO).

Have you thought of using a wider source such as angel.co ? I know it's a lot of work, so think twice before spending time.
 
1
•••
Thanks for the good work

I also vote for longer period, ideally: since origin of time or at least 3 months.

I'd also remove 4L that pollute the stats

Keyword categorization is an issue. It's really the perception by an end user that counts. For example askademic would immediately be 'translated' into ask academic and could be categorized in 'almost keyword' category rather than invented. I would reserve the terms keyword+suffix and prefix+keyword to their strict definition to avoid confusion.

In many cases, a search in google will help you define in what category put a keyword

Most likely a given domain could (and should) fall in several categories

For me, I'd prefer the raw data in the form of a multi column spreadhseet (eg: domain/price/DateCreated or age/Invented/keyword+suffix etc...) that would allow me to pull my own statistics.

I am not too sure that the first/last letters are statistically relevant for such small numbers. And in any case, they are not relevant for anything that can be related to a keyword. For example, askademic would add a 'c' in the count of the last letters but the 'c' is really accidental and does not correspond to a 'prefered sound' in the english language (at least IMHO).

Have you thought of using a wider source such as angel.co ? I know it's a lot of work, so think twice before spending time.
Thank your for the input!

Good points!
The issue with the first/last letter had occured to me. So I was in doubt if it was that relevant. maybe it can be more valuable only for the invented domains...

How would I get access to a wider source using angel.co? Posting this statistical work as a job and outsourcing? That would have costs...

Thanks!
 
0
•••
The issue with the first/last letter had occured to me. So I was in doubt if it was that relevant. maybe it can be more valuable only for the invented domains

Thanks for your feed back. It's a very interesting question, and I don't have the answer.

I think that indeed almost-keywords-domains whether they are misspelled, prefix, suffixes, or whatever are a different animal than invented domains.

A few months ago a NP member (don't recall who) was using letter combinations rather than letters to analyze brandable domains.

For example, abazab (just an example, I hope it's not an almost-keyword) would be decomposed into a/ab/ba/az/za/ab/b

He would then draw statistics based on the frequency of letter combinations. Later, he informed me that this method was obsolete and he was working on a different approach. I haven't seen anything new on the subject since.

Rather than letters, I thought of 'pronounceable items' (PI). I scanned all english words for combinations of letters and I made a datase base with them. Based on that, I can calculate if a domain is pronounceable or not. Unfortunately, many invented domains use combinations of letters that do not exist in any english word, but sound very nicely and can clearly be pronounced.

I've also looked at syllables, but it was unconclusive.

One thing that worries me is to draw statistics on such small numbers as ~80 domains per month. That's the reason I started looking at angel.co: many companies listed are startups, some well financed, and even if no transaction has been published on the domains they acquired, we can be reasonably assume the domains they choose are a sellable/trendy/good domain. I am doing some work on that. PM me if you want to discuss.

I'll finish with a specific question:

Can you imagine a way to determine automatically if a domain is an almost-keyword or a totally invented domain ? It's of course very easy for pure prefix+keyword or keyword+suffix. It's probably feasible for simply mispelled keywords (one letter changed, doubled...) I cannot think of a simple process for such domains as askademic or viruscape.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
I'll finish with a specific question:

Can you imagine a way to determine automatically if a domain is an almost-keyword or a totally invented domain ? It's of course very easy for pure prefix+keyword or keyword+suffix. It's probably feasible for simply mispelled keywords (one letter changed, doubled...) I cannot think of a simple process for such domains as askademic or viruscape.

I have a question to the specific question you left behind.

Lets say we know that 4 ending letter "emic" has a frequency of let's say 20 in sold data
and first 2 consecutive letter "as" appeared 12 times in sold data.

So question is what is the interpretation of such stats?
 
Last edited:
1
•••
I have a question to the specific question you left behind.

Lets say we know that 4 ending letter "emic" has a frequency of let's say 20 in sold data
and first 2 consecutive letter "as" appeared 12 times in sold data.

So question is what the interpretation of such stats?

I am not sure I understand your question. Sorry if my answer is not relevant

The main idea is to somehow automate pre-selection of brandable domains. Let's assume we have a list of potential domains (such as auctions, expired, home built...) and we try to select those who have some merrit and are worth some further investigation.

First, we look at keyword domains, and if found we eliminate (or preselect) them
Then we look at keywords + suffix or suffix + keywords
we can similarly try to find misspelled. Some are easy, some may be quite difficult to detect.
Probably, some domains will fall in several categories. It does not really matter.

Then we look at the rest: some can be invented domains, some can be almost-keywords (such as askademic). Is there a way to determine if there are related keywords.

Now, if we find that many domains are composed of a keyword + 'emic', I would look if the 'other part' is a keyword or not and possibly add this to my list of suffixes if it's not there already.
 
1
•••
Hello!

Both @Dnbolt and @aramyus raise very interesting points and questions.
As far as my coding abilities, these last few posts (and the idea of automated processes) are way over my skills! :)

Anyway, keep those inputs coming!
 
0
•••
following your info

cacoua.com

is the most promissing domain

I just regged it ;)
thanks
 
1
•••
1
•••
Last edited:
1
•••
yes you are right

sereio.com

looks good too;)

thanks
Hello!

Proceed with caution! :)

My info table is still "under development"! Please do not make decisions based on this info alone, without your own research.

Anyway, best of luck with those names!!
 
1
•••
Hello!

Proceed with caution! :)

My info table is still "under development"! Please do not make decisions based on this info alone, without your own research.

Anyway, best of luck with those names!!


oh then I better delete them ...

but now I like them already....
 
2
•••
2
•••
1
•••
As some others pointed out already this would be more useful when more (as much as possible) data is used.
 
1
•••
2
•••
As some others pointed out already this would be more useful when more (as much as possible) data is used.

So what are the candidates for more data?
 
1
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back