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

 

[Beezy]

The probabilities should be exactly the same if the "quality" is the same-UNLESS there is an edge somewhere. Probabilities simply don't lie.

The 'if the "quality" is the same' part destroys your whole hypothetical argument, though.

 

[London555]

The 'if the "quality" is the same' part destroys your whole hypothetical argument, though.

Actually it's not a "hypothetical" argument at all. The probability case is fact and the term "quality" is meant to destroy it. I don't understand your statement at all.

 

[12345]

If you take 5 sellers portfolios that add up to 2,000 names like your portfolio don't you think they should have similar amount in sales

No, not necessarily. The sales stats of any 2000 names over a period of three months would never give you a statically significant result (p-value) in the statistical definition of the term. The number of sales will always be too small. I'm too far removed from stats and econometrics classes, so I won't try to do a model for it

Anecdotally, I've had plenty of slow months followed by a 5x-10 increase in sales over the next few months. Everyone experiences this.

It's also important to consider how long names have been published, if they are continuing to publish names, the prices on the names etc. If the majority of your published names are over really old or really new that will effect things. If you are just selling high priced LLLL names, you won't expect to get a high sell through rate.

 

[Beezy]

Actually it's not a "hypothetical" argument at all. The probability case is fact and the term "quality" is meant to destroy it. I don't understand your statement at all.

My problem is that the formula for probability that people are presenting is:

Number of domains / sales.

There are a bunch of other factors that are a part of the real equation, many of which we don't have access to.

So to present that as the equation is just wrong (imo). (Michael just replied while I was typing this with other factors that need considering).

 

[London555]

My problem is that the formula for probability that people are presenting is:

Number of domains / sales.

There are a bunch of other factors that are a part of the real equation, many of which we don't have access to.

So to present that as the equation is just wrong (imo). (Michael just replied while I was typing this with other factors that need considering).

That's exactly why I said "UNLESS there's an edge"

 

[trelgor]

I don't agree with ANY of this math.

This isn't a lottery. Names aren't being picked out of a hat.

Nope. There is naturally a quality ladder, same as with keyword metrics. With brandables however it seems subtle, subjective and elusive. It's not just searches and cpc. A greater knowledge of how businesses and niches think when choosing a name is needed. The learning curve is greater. The reward might be aswell. Domaining has always been more than metrics.

A better tuned portfolio naturally has more sales.

On the other hand comparing sales is the only way to measure success and evolve. And I do believe lessons can be learned in these stats. Especially since BB allegedly does not accept poor quality names.

I don't believe big sales are pointing towards foul play a some insinuate. I believe they are the product of hard work.

Low sales however, bordering on catastrophic, should not be happening if the BB review process is working properly.

What I would like to see on BB, as a novice in this field, is a spectrum of sustainable sales from low to high to supernatural. Not someone killing it and others struggling.

That may be wishful thinking.

 

[London555]

No, not necessarily. The sales stats of any 2000 names over a period of three months would never give you a statically significant result (p-value) in the statistical definition of the term. The number of sales will always be too small. I'm too far removed from stats and econometrics classes, so I won't try to do a model for it

Anecdotally, I've had plenty of slow months followed by a 5x-10 increase in sales over the next few months. Everyone experiences this.

It's also important to consider how long names have been published, if they are continuing to publish names, the prices on the names etc. If the majority of your published names are over really old or really new that will effect things. If you are just selling high priced LLLL names, you won't expect to get a high sell through rate.

I don't think we'll be coming up with any P-Values on this thread Michael lol and you're correct 3 months is not a long enough time frame to determine a threshold value.

 

[KickstartNames]

Anyways, my first 3 published today:
One ended up on the middle of page 1 (staff picks sort order) and is of course rapidly descending.
I could not find the other two (without direct name search) when i stopped clicking after page 17.....so my hope goes to someone one day want to look at a name with 'travel' in it.
Don´t get me wrong, I am not criticizing, just being realistic.

 

[London555]

Anyways, my first 3 published today:
One ended up on the middle of page 1 (staff picks sort order) and is of course rapidly descending.
I could not find the other two (without direct name search) when i stopped clicking after page 17.....so my hope goes to someone one day want to look at a name with 'travel' in it.
Don´t get me wrong, I am not criticizing, just being realistic.

Good luck with them.

 

[vydenmyria]

Surprised to see a domain of mine on the front page for well over an hour! Sprova.com

 

[Dominic Belley]

Surprised to see a domain of mine on the front page for well over an hour! Sprova.com

You are at the very top of the front page. You'll be there for a couple of days.

.... unless a new "hatch" wave comes and steals all the exposure.

 

[campout]

@Beezy Has anyone said that every single seller's sell-through rate should be exactly the same? No. You're making a straw man argument.

 

[ApeXX]

@Beezy Has anyone said that every single seller's sell-through rate should be exactly the same? No. You're making a straw man argument.

Agreed. I think the general concern is that it appears Michael Krell has a significantly higher sell-through rate than any of us. While the sample size is far too small when looking at our individual portfolio's, our combined portfolio's are a much closer comparison and also represent significantly less sales than Michael is seeing.

Some people will attribute this variance to house advantage, or Michael Krell's name brand, or just pure luck of the draw.. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

 

[hookbox]

Bottom line, if 5 sellers have a combined total of 2,000 quality names that have been listed for the past 6 months and Michael Krell has 2,000 quality names that have been listed for the past 6 months then the sell through rate if all things are considered equal should be very very similar. When Michael sells 17 in one month and the other group sells only a couple in three months then there is a major problem. I could understand if Michael sold 17 and the combined group sold 10 but when the combined group adds up to zero, one, two or three sales over the course of many months then something is wrong. People can say to their blue in the face that based on formulas and yada yada yada but this does not add up.

 

[jamesau]

I think I read a comment a few pages back regarding the increasing BB portfolio but there still being room in some of the more under-stocked niches/keywords.

Michael are you able to perhaps disclose some of the keywords that your customers have brought to your attention where they were unable to find a suitable domain? Preferably in some sort of popularity order.

I understand the onus would still be on sellers to use this information wisely and not register hundreds of related names and expect immediate acceptance. But I feel like it might help create some transparency and give sellers more information to act on.

Longer term hopefully you could also publish your keyword data for domain sales without disclosing the domain. That way sellers could conduct their own research into keyword demand and trends.

 

[NameFit]

I think it would be better to understand the buyer's navigation/search patterns and data display options. Sellers may want to get more insight into how buyers buy names. E.g. it would be good to have data on

- How many buyers search on keywords - if so what are the commonly used keywords, and how are keywords defined for the domains, what ontology is in place for categorization of domains and to help buyers with the search
- How many just start browsing through pages, it would be good to know after how many pages they normally give up on average
- What is the most common buyer navigation pattern
- how are the names arranged - what are the display criteria, One would not expect the older names being buried down and they do not turn into FILO (First in Last out). May be if there is some randomization in play?
- Are there some social aspects in search criteria that play a role
- Are there some geographical criteria for search - some words being popular in certain regions/countries, some word patterns are just no no.
- Also would it be helpful to categorize the names and analyze the sales statistics e.g. pure brandables (made up) vs. keyword brandables vs. meaningful 2 keyword names.. (sorry if my categorization is not perfect/right).

All the data if tracked over duration can give better perspective of 'what sells' and what way things are heading. Knowing the search and navigation patterns of the buyers will help the site decide the correct size of inventory/display patterns that can possibly lead to increased sales - purpose of the site and of sellers.

I personally think it is a scaling up issue - and 'any' site would face the sames issues given
- inventory size (we are looking at 15,000+ names and expected to grow)
- nature of merchandise (type of domains sold, lots and lots of comparable - you really do not have many variables to play with when things are so similar, sound close. How do you distinguish one from another.)

The issues are really not uncommon. I think the current situation would qualify to be a research topic. I would strongly urge every seller to role-play as buyer and understand what buyer feels like/goes through if the have to do some search and buy a name. "Read the buyers mind through simulation and data collection". May be they identify something that they only discovered that is helpful to them. May be company can hire companies that do surveys and prepare questionnaires for users. A comprehensive feedback from the test users should be collected, analyzed, investigated further, and implemented as necessary.

It is a collaborative effort on part of everyone involved with the site, stakeholders, buyers, and sellers, and lot of aspects need to be looked into.

 

[JimJammy]

Bottom line, if 5 sellers have a combined total of 2,000 quality names that have been listed for the past 6 months and Michael Krell has 2,000 quality names that have been listed for the past 6 months then the sell through rate if all things are considered equal should be very very similar. When Michael sells 17 in one month and the other group sells only a couple in three months then there is a major problem. I could understand if Michael sold 17 and the combined group sold 10 but when the combined group adds up to zero, one, two or three sales over the course of many months then something is wrong. People can say to their blue in the face that based on formulas and yada yada yada but this does not add up.

I'm actually with Beezy on this one to some degree but I do see your point obviously.

I'm a target domainer. Like most here, I purchase domains based on a set of criteria that I've set myself (is there an exact domain with a lesser extension as a website, are there at least 3 other websites where my domain would be better eg ThingyOnline.com and I own Thingy.com. If it's keywords, are there ads in Google etc etc). I've met domainers that own hundreds of domains that they bought basically because they liked them, they did no research beforehand, or they think they are jumping on the bandwagon of 'the next big thing' (think of the Virtual Reality thread here as an example!). And they wonder why I sell 10 X the domains they do.

Really, I see no difference with brandables.... was the domain a former (failed) website with existing traffic... do I read the tech websites every day and know what the latest buzz words are... do I watch the newly funded startups... etc etc.

The point I'm making is: Whatever the brandable domainers set of criteria are can greatly sway his sales rate in the same way as the target domainer.

Michael has often referred to buying his domains based on a set of criteria, so he has done his homework and is reaping the benefit. To demand that he supply you with the benefit of his 4 years brandable experience is a little unfair. There is no conflict of interest, it's his/Margots business and they are allowing us the opportunity to also offer our domains to their clients (for a fee). To remove this 'conflict of interest' everyone is talking about, they would have to remove us!

Using Michael as an example of a successful brandable domainer is difficult because I haven't sat and analysed his set of criteria and have no idea what they are, but a really obvious example are the 4 letter brandable domainers, they too are outselling everyone else.

I also agree with you on the 'it's a numbers game' comment, just as it is with the target domainer.

 

[campout]

I think the best way to get inside Michael's head is to read all his past posts on handreg.com.

 

[DKN]

Congrats Michael for reaching 2000 milestone in BB

 

[London555]

Michael Krell- We just noticed Michael that you own TigerCloud.com and it's on BrandBucket at $7695 but here's the catch and this proves there's a double standard at BrandBucket. You also have it listed on GoDaddy in the auctions. Here's what upsetting Michael-not that you have it listed at someplace other then BB but last week alone I got multiple emails stating that some of my BrandBucket listed domains were listed elsewhere and MUST be removed as per the BB agreement. We scrambled around-put in the damn time and got them all removed and now we see this. If we sound upset it's because we are. We acted in good faith with BrandBucket -we expect the same in return.