BrandBucket Experience

[xtremex]

hello

I am new to BrandBucket. Before getting my hands on this

I wish to experience about brandbucket from my fellow members


Thanks

 

[daj]

Thiss.com - regged since 2001 - not developped

Uniquee.com - developed

Trulyy.com - developed

Brandablee.com - developed

Aboutt.com - huge domains $2395

Namess.com - redirected

Mentionedd.com - deleted and available for registration

I wonder what About.com would think if someone developed Aboutt.com, which is most likely getting accidental typo traffic meant to go to their website. I imagine they'd start a legal proceeding against them and win.

 

[Recons.Com]

I registered Vaultt /com on days and love the name. Couldn't care less who owns Vault.com, as, even if that would be available, it would have been XXX,XXX name. As for radio test, you just say "go to vaultt.com, that is vault with double T". Intentional misspelling has been a way of unique branding for tens of years, even before the Internet.

And even after that, do you think Twitter is proper derivative of tweet?

 

[JimJammy]

Boutt is a surname.

Dr Anthony Boutt would win.

It's all about context, as explained above.

 

[trelgor]

I wonder what About.com would think if someone developed Aboutt.com, which is most likely getting accidental typo traffic meant to go to their website. I imagine they'd start a legal proceeding against them and win.

Probablyy. And in another example vice versa.

 

[Recons.Com]

Boutt is a surname.

Dr Anthony Boutt would win.

It's all about context, as explained above.

Agree. Also, About Trees, About Trademarks etc. would also win easily on AboutT.

If you name your company Aboutt LTD and buy aboutt.com and operate in different area from About.com then you'd still win.

 

[daj]

I registered Vaultt /com on days and love the name. Couldn't care less who owns Vault.com, as, even if that would be available, it would have been XXX,XXX name. As for radio test, you just say "go to vaultt.com, that is vault with double T". Intentional misspelling has been a way of unique branding for tens of years, even before the Internet.

And even after that, do you think Twitter is proper derivative of tweet?

I just feel if someone owns a domain that has an established business on it, such as Google.com and I happen to find that Googlee.com is available, than I should be expected to be sued by them regardless of how I develop the website I own. Even if my name is Lee and I'm googlyeyed and I'm making a blog about googlyeyed people I still feel as if I'm infringing on them in some way because we all know Google.com existed before I did. You know what I mean?

I see that Vault.com is an established business. For me to register Vaultt.com and develop it I would feel bad to do so because they've been around longer and I wouldn't want my customers or traffic to get confused by our domains. Why not go for WordVault.com which to me seem more brandable? I feel Vaultt.com can easily be confused for Vault.com, Vaulte, Vaultee.com, Vaulty.com. I rather go for a creative two word.com personally but I guess that's just me.

 

[Recons.Com]

But Google is already a brandable and derivative of it has good risk of being in TM infringement.

Google itself is a derivative of Googol, so another derivative of Googol, let's say Googolr won't be in TM infringement (while, Googler would probably be) with Google if it stays away from areas where Google is well known brand, like search, glasses, hosting etc.

 

[JimJammy]

I just feel if someone owns a domain that has an established business on it, such as Google.com and I happen to find that Googlee.com is available, than I should be expected to be sued by them regardless of how I develop the website I own. Even if my name is Lee and I'm googlyeyed and I'm making a blog about googlyeyed people I still feel as if I'm infringing on them in some way because we all know Google.com existed before I did. You know what I mean?

I see that Vault.com is an established business. For me to register Vaultt.com and develop it I would feel bad to do so because they've been around longer and I wouldn't want my customers or traffic to get confused by our domains. Why not go for WordVault.com which to me seem more brandable? I feel Vaultt.com can easily be confused for Vault.com, Vaulte, Vaultee.com, Vaulty.com. I rather go for a creative two word.com personally but I guess that's just me.

I understand where you are coming from on generic words, unfortunately it's just a fact that trademark law doesn't quite have the morals you have!

 

[Recons.Com]

I understand where you are coming from on generic words, unfortunately it's just a fact that trademark law doesn't quite have the morals you have!

It's got to. It might be the matter of financial resources, as a recent UDRP case, where a reverse hijack with no moral/legal ground pretty much was allowed, showed, but law itself operates with that "spirit". If it would have been the opposite, the likes of Apple, Google, P&G, Unilever would have gobbled up pretty much every valuable word and its derivatives for trademark.

 

[Keith DeBoer]

Brandbucket seem to cater to selling uncreative typo (and possibly trademarked) domains that may have issues in the future.

Examples:
Phaase.com - typo of Phase.com, an established website.
Healerr.com - typo of Healer.com, an established website. (I deleted my domain Healdr.com because it could also be considered a typo of Healer, even though I saw it as Heal + Doctor)
Fuunk.com
Globee.com
Summerr.com
Luckk.com
Lemonn.com
Maryy.com - typo of Mary.com, an established website.
Croow.com - typo of Crow.com, an established website.
Hikerr.com - typo of Hiker.com, an established website.
Chaalk.com - typo of Chalk.com, an established website.
TreeHuggr.com - typo of Treehugger.com, an established website.
etc.

Why even allow such domains to be sold? How would you feel if someone registered BrandBuckett.com? According to your criteria it would be a great unique brandable domain, right!

Isn't the whole point of owning a brandable domain to stand apart, to have a name that can't be mistaken for another? Anyone who buys these domains is going to lose traffic to the proper word. Why cater to typosquatting domains that are possible ICANN disputes in the making?

First, of all defensive registration is something all companies do. Most companies own dozens of domains that cover many variations of their main domain in several TLDs. That's common sense and cheaper than a UDRP or a lawsuit.

For example: Linda.com forwards to Lynda.com.

Second, It's only a trademark violation or a typosquat if the new owner sets up a business that is designed to compete with the existing website, product or service. For example: Mary.com is a website containing Internet games for children. If someone buys Maryy.com (which I own) and they set up a mail order site for women's clothes there is no typo competition or trademark issues.

For example: Lindaa.com is a web hosting and email site while Liinda.com is a personal website for a photographer.

 

[daj]

First, of all defensive registration is something all companies do. Most companies own dozens of domains that cover many variations of their main domain in several TLDs. That's common sense and cheaper than a UDRP or a lawsuit.

For example: Linda.com forwards to Lynda.com.

Second, It's only a trademark violation or a typosquat if the new owner sets up a business that is designed to compete with the existing website, product or service. For example: Mary.com is a website containing Internet games for children. If someone buys Maryy.com (which I own) and they set up a mail order site for women's clothes there is no typo competition or trademark issues.

For example: Lindaa.com is a web hosting and email site while Liinda.com is a personal website for a photographer.

I see your point when it comes to Lindaa.com or Maryy.com as those names can go with many different niches/brands, but when it comes to a domain that is more niche specific, such as Healerr.com, since Healer.com has a live trademark in the health/healing/wellness/medical niche, wouldn't it be better for no one to own it, since you're very limited in what one can do with it due to their trademark preventing you from putting up a site in the same niche?

 

[Sepia Marketing]

I have 50+ listings with brandbucket. It's an awesome venues. I sell 20% of listed domain/year of listing. They are extraordinarily picky and they don't get easier with a great sales record. It's well worth the $10. Early on I would pick a greater than $100 logo designs and honestly didn't seem to make a difference.

I have to buy 6 domains to get 1 listed. I actually just launched my own site
To be honest everybody with these sites is really picky. It'd be great if I could find someone who had a bunch of inventory and just combine sites who I'd take a 1/3rd or so at least and just put the rest down to taste. The plethora of sites is getting ridiculous.

I finally found a good logo person off odesk who's doing 2 an hour at 3$ an hour. I just figure the logo is a cost of doing business and don't play it up like it's adding huge value.

I get occasional sales off afternic and sedo but nothing compared to BB. Got the first sales of np last month.

I have been wondering whether paying the logo person more than the $100 made a difference. I just listed a name with them and, not knowing any better, chose to go with $100 to the designer. I find the logo to be very boring, only one color, nothing at all that really pops like with some of the other logos I see on there. I was certain I had made a mistake with paying so little and thought perhaps I would pay more the next time. So interesting that you did not find any difference.

Has anyone else found there to be a difference in logo with paying more?

 

[Recons.Com]

I find the logo thing a conflict of interest. First of all, logos of that quality lump sum cost $20-40 here on NP, on Freelancer.com etc., not $100. So, in addition to $10 listing fee, BB gets $60-80 per sold name from logo, unless they found some expensive Western logo designers, which wouldn't be quite logical.

Second, if BB is in it with its sellers, the logo cost should come out of the sale before the split, not from the net payout to client. So, if done fairly, the logos would cost in $50 (normal)-$100 (prem) still giving some profit to BB for managing it, that amount would come out of sale price and then 70%-30% split would occur.

Also, @michaeljkrell, I would appreciate if you respond to PM. Thanks beforehand.

 

[Sepia Marketing]

I find the logo thing a conflict of interest. First of all, logos of that quality lump sum cost $20-40 here on NP, on Freelancer.com etc., not $100. So, in addition to $10 listing fee, BB gets $60-80 per sold name from logo, unless they found some expensive Western logo designers, which wouldn't be quite logical.

Second, if BB is in it with its sellers, the logo cost should come out of the sale before the split, not from the net payout to client. So, if done fairly, the logos would cost in $50 (normal)-$100 (prem) still giving some profit to BB for managing it, that amount would come out of sale price and then 70%-30% split would occur.

Also, @michaeljkrell, I would appreciate if you respond to PM. Thanks beforehand.

Well now I'm smoking mad. (somewhat mostly kind of joking) Makes a lot of sense how you just broke it down.

 

[Keith DeBoer]

Drew Roesnoer said on Domain Sherpa to his fellow panel members: "most of the names we own won't sell in our lifetime".

Domaining is speculative. Even successful domainers only sell a small percentage of their domains each year. BB and brandables are no different. That means the logo designer only gets paid for a tiny percentage of the logos he/she designs for us and BB. Hence the appearance of over compensation. The seller, logo designer and BB are all partners in a speculative venture.

 

[Recons.Com]

Ok, that makes sense. Let's say, they pay a designer $10 that they get for listing + 4% chance of getting 100$ in any given year. Within 5 years he'll get $10 immediately, then 4+4+4+4+4. That is fair. So, you are right and I retract that portion about making money off that by BB.

I still believe, though, that the amount has to come from the gross pay, not from the net.

 

[cocaseco]

You mentioned the current method proved most successful,...... to who? Sellers or Brandbucket?

Hopefully to BB or it will be a sure sign they have lost their business acumen. They aren't in it for domainers, they are using our names and taking a high price for it. Domainers invest their own capital and run all the risk. That's their business model. So many people lately think that this is a partnership and that things should be done for domainers as much as BB. It doesn't work that way and never will. As a domainer, you are being used and you have to decide if you are OK with it. I am absolutely OK with it and simply look at the fee as a COGS expense. If people want a "fair" deal, they will have to set up their own marketplace. BB spends a lot on advertising and other support, so that I don't have to. And for that, they earn their commission.

Does that make it okay to do? Why don't start-ups get more creative?

Because they are focusing on their business. What do I care what they do with the logo or if they will get sued? I don't. Pay me my money and none of the rest of it is my problem.

I have been wondering whether paying the logo person more than the $100 made a difference. .....Has anyone else found there to be a difference in logo with paying more?

I have not found that it makes any difference. As an ex-BB logo maker, nothing different happens with a $500 logo vs a $100 logo. They all go in the same queue and are grabbed by the first person that sees them. Logo designers simply see a large list of logos that need completion and you pick the ones you want to work on. Perhaps, because they are grabbed faster, they get done faster, but it doesn't affect the quality.

 

[Sepia Marketing]

Hopefully to BB or it will be a sure sign they have lost their business acumen. They aren't in it for domainers, they are using our names and taking a high price for it. Domainers invest their own capital and run all the risk. That's their business model. So many people lately think that this is a partnership and that things should be done for domainers as much as BB. It doesn't work that way and never will. As a domainer, you are being used and you have to decide if you are OK with it. I am absolutely OK with it and simply look at the fee as a COGS expense. If people want a "fair" deal, they will have to set up their own marketplace. BB spends a lot on advertising and other support, so that I don't have to. And for that, they earn their commission.



Because they are focusing on their business. What do I care what they do with the logo or if they will get sued? I don't. Pay me my money and none of the rest of it is my problem.



I have not found that it makes any difference. As an ex-BB logo maker, nothing different happens with a $500 logo vs a $100 logo. They all go in the same queue and are grabbed by the first person that sees them. Logo designers simply see a large list of logos that need completion and you pick the ones you want to work on. Perhaps, because they are grabbed faster, they get done faster, but it doesn't affect the quality.

OK, so the person who grabbed my logo from the list to work on was perhaps just not that imaginative or good? Kind of the luck of the draw who you get then. Thanks for your answer.

 

[cocaseco]

OK, so the person who grabbed my logo from the list to work on was perhaps just not that imaginative or good? Kind of the luck of the draw who you get then. Thanks for your answer.

Exactly...he was simply quicker than the next guy to log on.

 

[Keith DeBoer]

I didn't say that sellers, BB and logo designers were equal partners. There are many kinds of partnerships. Some are 50/50, some are 80/20. Each partner benefits proportionately.

 

[Keith DeBoer]

First, of all defensive registration is something all companies do. Most companies own dozens of domains that cover many variations of their main domain in several TLDs. That's common sense and cheaper than a UDRP or a lawsuit.

For example: Linda.com forwards to Lynda.com.

Second, It's only a trademark violation or a typosquat if the new owner sets up a business that is designed to compete with the existing website, product or service. For example: Mary.com is a website containing Internet games for children. If someone buys Maryy.com (which I own) and they set up a mail order site for women's clothes there is no typo competition or trademark issues.

For example: Lindaa.com is a web hosting and email site while Liinda.com is a personal website for a photographer.

CORRECTION: I do not own Maryy.com. My mistake. But I do own Sallyy, Katyy, Dollyy, Judyy, and others that are listed on BB.

 

[JimJammy]

@michaeljkrell the brandbucket.com/domain url doesn't work anymore for approved names (only for published). It used to point to a coming-soon-to-BB page, now it's just a 404 error. Is this normal, bug, or temporary issue?

@michaeljkrell this was first raised on the 5th February. Any ETA on a fix please?

 

[Chris Hydrick]

@michaeljkrell this was first raised on the 5th February. Any ETA on a fix please?

Maybe @michaeljkrell is too busy.

Perhaps they have somebody else who is more effective in fixing issues?

I'm going to email [email protected] with my issues. If they receive enough requests from all of us, our issues can't be ignored.

Edit: I've sent three requests this morning. I will continue to report these unanswered issues until a resolution is reached. Assistance in emailing them to fix these glitches is appreciated.

 

[12345]

@michaeljkrell this was first raised on the 5th February. Any ETA on a fix please?

We are hoping this gets resolved early next week.

[email protected] is the best way to contact us for any issues. Julia does a great job at organizing the help requests, and will bring it to my attention if needed.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Did anybody catch the latest newsletter form January 29th?

If you're using Gmail, check your spam.They recently published a domain that had been flagged by google for malware.

I reported it to Michael on Friday, a few hours after it happened. I informed him that the domain owner had to contact google to get this removed. The domain is still live, but blocked by Google. They are waiting for the seller to request removal.

Michael recognized the issue on Sunday, and said his team would look into it. When repeatedly asked to resend the newsletter without the flagged domain, he reported

"Our open and click-through rates in the last newsletter were very similar to our past weekly emails, so we don't feel that it is necessary to send this out again."

Be that as it may, but I had 50 domains published in that newsletter. I look forward to publishing new domains for the marketing advantages. The two of my sales came after the newsletter was published. I don't like having my domains affiliated with malicious domains. If anybody else feels the same way, please raise their concern.


Click here to learn how to check your domains for flags

It's nice to see todays NewsLetter wasn't flagged for Malware like the one from the week of January 18th.

I'm upset a retraction email was never sent. I feel anybody who paid listing fee's during this period should have their fee's partially refunded. We did not ask for you to include our domains with malicious domains.

Notice the first domain?

It redirects to BrandBucket, but there is no logo attached any more.

If you copy the C******P**.com and email from one email account to another email account, the email will go to your spam and reported as flagged. The flagging of malicious domains disables images from loading, so no enduser was able to open the malware affiliated newsletter.