.com has been an awful investment - PROOF!

[netfleet]

A couple of years ago, I posted this

http://www.namepros.com/domain-name-discussion/446793-com-peak-approaching.html

Basically a post about how ccTLD values would increase at the expense of .com. Most people scoffed with the predictable 'com is king' crap, however now that 2009 is over, let's look at the last few years of reported sales thanks to DNJournal.

Below I'm using the median of the top 100 reported sales for each category. Rather than extract all the com's from the all sales charts, I'm being simplistic & using the All Sales chart as a measure of com values (after all these charts are dominated by .com sales)

Year.......Com Sales .... ccTLD Sales

2006.......$125K........ $13K
2007.......$200K ....... $21K
2008.......$188K ....... $26K
2009.......$141K ....... $37K

So, if you'd have invested in a bunch of typical .com names in 2006 and sold them in 2009, you'd have made a lousy 12% over those 3 years. Invested the same money in a broad selection of ccTLDs and you've nearly tripled your money.

 

[Vito]

Excellent Post.

Your simplistic approach at the Top 100 sales makes perfect sense.
So, more and more people are migrating towards whatever their local extension may be, rather than coughing up the price-tag of the almighty .com
As the last 4 years indicate, the cctld's seem to be a wise investment.
Very Interesting.
Repped!

 

[cache]

I think the problem is the sampling method of using "All Sales chart".

 

[onlinelife]

Impressive, in few years they will say 'cctld is King'
Rep-ped!

 

[dtagr]

12% is a good level of return in comparison to other types of investments.

 

[primavera]

So, if you'd have invested in a bunch of typical .com names in 2006 and sold them in 2009, you'd have made a lousy 12% over those 3 years. Invested the same money in a broad selection of ccTLDs and you've nearly tripled your money.

IMHO, your view is based on unrealized scenarios. Unless I am missing something, the actualized profit margin for .com sales vs. those of other tlds should be compared. The acknowledgment of sale price increases for particular tlds in comparison with another does not equate better profits for one or the other.

 

[bmugford]

This data is being used in a way that is far too simplistic.

Brad

 

[Mark]

I had something pretty close typed in and opted not to Brad

This comparison really is a bit too simple though.
How long have the majority of cctld's been available ?
How long have they been available to the masses (Many reduce restrictions after the extension does not take off as they hoped) ?
When was the majority of keyword cctlds regd vs .com (Over the past 4 years perhaps) ?

I have nothing against cctld's BTW ... But think your reasoning is flawed.

 

[DN BROKER]

I had something pretty close typed in and opted not to Brad

This comparison really is a bit too simple though.
How long have the majority of cctld's been available ?
How long have they been available to the masses (Many reduce restrictions after the extension does not take off as they hoped) ?
When was the majority of keyword cctlds regd vs .com (Over the past 4 years perhaps) ?

I have nothing against cctld's BTW ... But think your reasoning is flawed.

Agreed

 

[netfleet]

I think the problem is the sampling method of using "All Sales chart".

I don't think it would make any difference. At least 90% of the top 100 sales are .coms

12% is a good level of return in comparison to other types of investments.

That's 12% over 3 years - annualised it's about 3% which is terrible.

IMHO, your view is based on unrealized scenarios. Unless I am missing something, the actualized profit margin for .com sales vs. those of other tlds should be compared. The acknowledgment of sale price increases for particular tlds in comparison with another does not equate better profits for one or the other.

I don't quite know what you mean? We can never know the actual profit margins in each sale. All I was trying to do with those figures is get an idea of values. People can profit in falling markets or static markets (buy buying & selling smarter or developing etc) but it's easier to do when you invest in an appreciating asset.

This data is being used in a way that is far too simplistic.

Brad

Why do you say that? It's just taking a sample of sales to get an idea of the market - just like real estate or stock market indices do. I can't think of any other way to measure values.


Thanks for the compliments too guys! I thought it was interesting analysis too.

 

[equity78]

Way too simplistic, and domains are individual. The fact that a big .de sold for $100,000 means nothing for the people owning lousy .ws or .cc. Grouping CCtld together is way off IMO.

Saying that you are doing same as someone would do for stock market is flawed. We all own the same S&P Index for example, only one person owns Cruises.co.uk. Obviously this simplistic approach is agenda driven as you are invested in com.au and other cctld. And I say this as someone whose greatest interest is outside of .com, so I am no .commie.

---------- Post added at 04:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:59 AM ----------

Another flaw of your analysis was you said "So, if you'd have invested in a bunch of typical .com names in 2006 and sold them in 2009, you'd have made a lousy 12% over those 3 years. Invested the same money in a broad selection of ccTLDs and you've nearly tripled your money."

Not me the .coms I sold between 06 to 09 was over 500% so I did not make 12% as I am sure neither did Brad or 100's of other people here.

 

[maxeaus]

I agree with the broad analysis netfleet, CC TLD's are working for many countries such as ours, Australia, the same cannot be said for the US though.

If you want a global business then .com remains king, if you want a localised business CC TLD,s make sense.

 

[domainwb]

Selling .Com's is easier than other extensions and also more valuable than others.

 

[telking]

com is and always will be king

 

[gazzip]

com is and always will be king

In America YES, but the same can't be said for some other countries like Germany, Australia, Britain, France and probably quiet a few more.

.COMs crown has lost some of its lustre over the last 10 years and with more extensions on the way it will likley not get any better.

If .com was TRULY KING worldwide I would be rich by now




.

 

[netfleet]

I smell fear! C'mon guys it's clear for all to see that the ponzi scheme of .com domain investment is collapsing

Com has sucked as an investment over the last few years and will continue to do so.

I had something pretty close typed in and opted not to Brad

This comparison really is a bit too simple though.
How long have the majority of cctld's been available ?
How long have they been available to the masses (Many reduce restrictions after the extension does not take off as they hoped) ?
When was the majority of keyword cctlds regd vs .com (Over the past 4 years perhaps) ?

I have nothing against cctld's BTW ... But think your reasoning is flawed.

Although your post starts as if you are disputing the analysis, your points actually support the argument by providing reasons why ccTLD values are increasing.

Remember I was just trying to illustrate how, broadly speaking ccTLD values have been on the up whilst .com values have been struggling.

Probably dozens of reasons why including some of your points above, I'm sure. So thanks for agreeing with me.

Way too simplistic, and domains are individual. The fact that a big .de sold for $100,000 means nothing for the people owning lousy .ws or .cc. Grouping CCtld together is way off IMO.

Yeah that's a fair point. I guess only the major ccTLDs are included in the top 100 report so we can't draw any conclusions on the others.

Saying that you are doing same as someone would do for stock market is flawed. We all own the same S&P Index for example, only one person owns Cruises.co.uk. Obviously this simplistic approach is agenda driven as you are invested in com.au and other cctld. And I say this as someone whose greatest interest is outside of .com, so I am no .commie.

The S&P, FTSE, DAX etc represent the top 100 companies on the stock exchange (I think - I'm no expert). These indices are used a barometer of the value of listed companies. Isn's this exactly the same thing?

Another flaw of your analysis was you said "So, if you'd have invested in a bunch of typical .com names in 2006 and sold them in 2009, you'd have made a lousy 12% over those 3 years. Invested the same money in a broad selection of ccTLDs and you've nearly tripled your money."

Not me the .coms I sold between 06 to 09 was over 500% so I did not make 12% as I am sure neither did Brad or 100's of other people here.

Note the word typical. People can make money in falling markets & lose money in rising markets.

Selling .Com's is easier than other extensions and also more valuable than others.

Not sure about selling com's being easier or not. I've had more success with selling .asis than .coms personally but of course each person has a different experience.

Com's are more valuable than others? Really? I didn't realise that. Thanks for the info.

com is and always will be king

As I've said dozens of times on this board, com's are the most value domains. We all know that. Nobody disputes that. The analysis above proves it. "Com is king" is an inane mantra that adds nothing to any serious discussion so please don't say it as it p***es me off no end!!! :D

 

[maxjohan]

Shake it off and become instead the doer, not one observe teh "one if scenarios" with crapmatch ups.

---------- Post added at 08:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 AM ----------

As 99.9% of domainers have no funds to own any of the top premium .com domains,
then we tend to point to results and desillusion our own worth, instead of admiting
we are not even close to play like the dot com moguls. :bingo:


I owncctlds and com, info domains ( it's human psychology) .
I do not have any agenda to say .com is worth more overall than cctlds.

Its a darn fact.

I don't quite know what you mean?

 

[DomainTalker]

Interesting comparisons, netfleet.


A couple of things strike me about this.


Mature(er) market v. Less Mature market(s).


Whilst the whole internet is really in its infancy, imo, within the domain market, .com is a much more mature market than any of the ccTLD markets (and, I include the major ccTLD's in that). Its a few years older than even the major ccTLD's that you're comparing it to.

In the earlier days of any market, you tend to get a much faster rising % value, year over year....and, then, as the market matures, the rate of growth slows down. Its a law of economics.

.com experienced a fantastic rate of ROI growth in its early years - then, naturally, slowed a bit.

So, what you are comparing is a timeframe between .com v. the CCTLD's - and, the particular timeframe of 2006 - 2009. You're not comparing absolute performance values, only relative performance values, in a given (arbitrary) timeframe. I agree, tho, that, during this exact timeframe, the (major) ccTLD's have enjoyed a better rate of value growth.



Conversely, if you compared the rate of value growth of .com v. the major ccTLD's from the beginning of each, I'm willing to bet that the .com ROI would be many times higher than the ROI of the major ccTLD's.


So, we need to be careful how we use comparative numbers....


Your point is that currently - or, in the recent 3 years (2006 - 2009) - we may well have done better investing in the major ccTLD's. And, you're probably right, in general (tho, there have been some spectacular .com ROI's on selected domains during 2006 - 2009).



The key question today, is: "How far along the 'market maturity line' are the major ccTLD's now?'.

I'm willing to bet that the ROI growth of the major ccTLD's will slow over the next few years because the market for them is maturing fast...

...Then, the comparison between .com v ccTLD ROI will be truly comparing apples with apples.



With that in mind - I wonder if it puts the implications of your analysis about ROI in ccTLD's in a very different light? And, whether the best investment strategy - going forward - will be .com, or, the ccTLD's?

.

 

[cartoonz]

Actually, the method you are using to justify your position is fatally flawed in that it does not consider the most important dynamic - VOLUME.

While there are definitely some impressive ccTLD sales out there, for every one of those there are far more .com's at the same level of sale.

I'm all for the value of ccTLD's but your reasoning and title in this thread is completely based on junk science.

Compare the TOTAL value of all .com sales with the same of all ccTLD's combined and you'll see a different view...

What you are saying is that Ferrari is a much better investment as a car company than Toyota because the average sale of a Ferrari is 6x that of a Toyota... yet in the real world, Toyota brought in exponentially more cash than Ferrari did so - as an investment in a car company - Toyota clearly is the better financial vehicle. No, I am not comparing ccTLD's to supercars nor .com's to economy cars...

 

[RogueWriter]

While I agree, the approach is too simplistic to get a true, 'scientific' comparison, as soon as I read the initial post I knew I was going to enjoy reading this thread. Great thoughts, everyone, interesting perspectives.