discuss Deplorable Domains?

[ThatNameGuy]

If just 1-2% of a domain portfolio sells annually, why do the remaining domains NOT sell? Are they just deplorable domains, or are there other reasons? I have my own suspicions, but I would like to hear from some of the so called professionals in the business. Thanks,

 

[ThatNameGuy]

"To each their own."

How boring would life be if we took the same path?

Hopefully everyone finds success on their own path. Wisdom comes from not criticizing other paths, but accepting your own path.

Thanks for that Internet.Domains. Having operated businesses in several different industries, I found both success and failure were all achieved differently. Much to the chagrin of my critics, I'm always looking for new paths. TQM (Total Quality Management) a business philosophy I subscribe to like SWOT, says, there's ALWAYS a BETTER WAY....not, "if it ain't broke don't fix it"

Thanks again

 

[Ategy]

Domainers only sell ~1-2% of domains on average a year simply because of the relatively fixed number of new businesses looking for domains each year versus the number of domains being held by domainers.

It's pretty straighforward math despite not knowing the precise numbers

Basically there are 330 million domains in existance.
Of which there are XX million held by domainers.

Then there are +XX million new businesses/products requiring domains each year
Also factoring in -XX million businesses/products folding and letting their domains expire
Giving a net of +X million domains required per year

Most of those X millions will be hand registrations.

While leaves maybe 500,000 end-user aftermarket sales ($x,xxx+)?
(complete guess, I honestly don't know .. i'm simply putting numbers for the sake of showing the formula)

If all domainers and aftermarket marketplaces combined hold 25 million domains, then that would be 2%.

My numbers are likely way off as I'm completely guesstimating to get to 2% .. but it gives you an idea of the overall formula. The fact is that 2% number could be off by a significant number.

While the X's are not precisely known, the overall numbers are relatively stable with obvious growth year over year as the world continues to get online.

Most definitely ICANN and Verisign could be doing things to bring more awareness and accessibility to stimulate growth. But at the end of the day we're talking a difference of max 5%. Definitely significant .. but negligible on the 2%/98% scale, as even a strong global domain marketing campaign that impacts the market a massive 5% would increase the 2% to 2.1% ... and that 2% is a complete guesstimate. The factor of error between 1%-2% is 100%, which totally overshadows the 5% in question. And frankly that "2%" could be even far less than 1% giving an even bigger margin of error.

But whether Verisign or anyone else call us cybersquatters or hoarders has zero relevance on the global demand for domains.

Even then the number of domains sold has nothing to do with profit or success. Some domainers sell domains at 100x, others at 10x, some at 2x, and some often sell at a loss. Then those sales need to be countered by costs (renewals/acquisitions). Which is why this whole discussion really doesn't change much for individuals.

@ThatDomainGuy is talking like ~98% of domains not getting sold each year is something negative ... when in fact it's completely natural. It's simply a market fact. It has extremely little to do with anything internal within the domain industry, and is simply a result of the progression of the global economy getting on the Internet.

It's actually a complete lack of understanding of where the demand for domains comes from that would make anyone think the number of domains purchased each year could really be influenced by something so insignificant as the domain industry compared to the driving engine of the $80 TRILLION global economy.


Bottom line is:

1- Domainers ironically have virtually zero influence on the actual demand for domains.

2- But all that is completely irrelevant and meaningless because each domainer has their own system and unique portfolios. So whether their overall relative sell-through of their portfolio is 1%, 2%, 5% or 10+% it really does matter at all. What does matter, is that whatever their number, that it works with their acquisition/costs vs revenue model.

A personally appropriate sell-through percentage can vary wildly based on average acquisition price vs average sales price. If you buy very low and sell at 100x, then you don't ever need anything close to 2% to be profitable. But if you sell at 5x then you need significantly higher than 2% annual sell-through to even start to make a profit.


Whatever the magic number (let's assume 2%), whether the remaining 98% are amazing or "deplorable" really doesn't come into play.

However where @ThatDomainGuy's original statement shows to be decisively wrong, is that I think it's fairly safe to say that many domains found within the 98% in previous years most certainly do sell in future years. It's not like domainers sell 2%, then the next year only sell a newly acquired 2%, while the same 98% continue to never sell year after year.

Fact is most of the domains that exist are horrible. Be they in use by end-users or held by domainers. There is no major alarming excess of "deplorable domains" held by domainers vs the deplorable domains hand registered by new end-users.


And that's my 2 cents on the ~2%!

 

[Ategy]

My sincere apologies to @ThatDomainGuy .. I obviously meant @ThatNameGuy (formerly Baloney)

Kinda proves my point about not really being any difference between NameCult and DomainCult when the context of "Name" at domain name related venues is meant to be short for "Domain Name"

Anyhow .. sorry @ThatDomainGuy for the confusion!

 

[ThatNameGuy]

Domainers only sell ~1-2% of domains on average a year simply because of the relatively fixed number of new businesses looking for domains each year versus the number of domains being held by domainers.

It's pretty straighforward math despite not knowing the precise numbers

Basically there are 330 million domains in existance.
Of which there are XX million held by domainers.

Then there are +XX million new businesses/products requiring domains each year
Also factoring in -XX million businesses/products folding and letting their domains expire
Giving a net of +X million domains required per year

Most of those X millions will be hand registrations.

While leaves maybe 500,000 end-user aftermarket sales ($x,xxx+)?
(complete guess, I honestly don't know .. i'm simply putting numbers for the sake of showing the formula)

If all domainers and aftermarket marketplaces combined hold 25 million domains, then that would be 2%.

My numbers are likely way off as I'm completely guesstimating to get to 2% .. but it gives you an idea of the overall formula. The fact is that 2% number could be off by a significant number.

While the X's are not precisely known, the overall numbers are relatively stable with obvious growth year over year as the world continues to get online.

Most definitely ICANN and Verisign could be doing things to bring more awareness and accessibility to stimulate growth. But at the end of the day we're talking a difference of max 5%. Definitely significant .. but negligible on the 2%/98% scale, as even a strong global domain marketing campaign that impacts the market a massive 5% would increase the 2% to 2.1% ... and that 2% is a complete guesstimate. The factor of error between 1%-2% is 100%, which totally overshadows the 5% in question. And frankly that "2%" could be even far less than 1% giving an even bigger margin of error.

But whether Verisign or anyone else call us cybersquatters or hoarders has zero relevance on the global demand for domains.

Even then the number of domains sold has nothing to do with profit or success. Some domainers sell domains at 100x, others at 10x, some at 2x, and some often sell at a loss. Then those sales need to be countered by costs (renewals/acquisitions). Which is why this whole discussion really doesn't change much for individuals.

@ThatDomainGuy is talking like ~98% of domains not getting sold each year is something negative ... when in fact it's completely natural. It's simply a market fact. It has extremely little to do with anything internal within the domain industry, and is simply a result of the progression of the global economy getting on the Internet.

It's actually a complete lack of understanding of where the demand for domains comes from that would make anyone think the number of domains purchased each year could really be influenced by something so insignificant as the domain industry compared to the driving engine of the $80 TRILLION global economy.


Bottom line is:

1- Domainers ironically have virtually zero influence on the actual demand for domains.

2- But all that is completely irrelevant and meaningless because each domainer has their own system and unique portfolios. So whether their overall relative sell-through of their portfolio is 1%, 2%, 5% or 10+% it really does matter at all. What does matter, is that whatever their number, that it works with their acquisition/costs vs revenue model.

A personally appropriate sell-through percentage can vary wildly based on average acquisition price vs average sales price. If you buy very low and sell at 100x, then you don't ever need anything close to 2% to be profitable. But if you sell at 5x then you need significantly higher than 2% annual sell-through to even start to make a profit.


Whatever the magic number (let's assume 2%), whether the remaining 98% are amazing or "deplorable" really doesn't come into play.

However where @ThatDomainGuy's original statement shows to be decisively wrong, is that I think it's fairly safe to say that many domains found within the 98% in previous years most certainly do sell in future years. It's not like domainers sell 2%, then the next year only sell a newly acquired 2%, while the same 98% continue to never sell year after year.

Fact is most of the domains that exist are horrible. Be they in use by end-users or held by domainers. There is no major alarming excess of "deplorable domains" held by domainers vs the deplorable domains hand registered by new end-users.


And that's my 2 cents on the ~2%!

You said; ]"Domainers only sell ~1-2% of domains on average a year simply because of the relatively fixed number of new businesses looking for domains each year versus the number of domains being held by domainers."

Wow...when you get going you can't stop...i didn't read your entire post because it's simply way to long. What you said is simply fake news totally made up by you. It's interesting too that you can't quote a single source for your information. Go back a couple of posts and see what Joystal said about his portfolio sales, and what he believed it could be if he were hitting on all cylinders. While he's not Verisign that I quote about "hoarders and scalpers", he does seem very smart and respectable.

Now I'll give you an example of a domain I plan to hand reg later that's never been reg'd before....RebrandPlan.com. Assuming you know what rebranding is and how popular it's become, why wouldn't you own this name for $8.50 Ategy? I'll tell you why you wouldn't...because you wouldn't know what to do with it if you owned it. My guess is you would probably set a price of a couple thousand dollars and list it with Uni, Sedo or Afternic and hope and pray they'll sell it for you. This is exactly why you'll only see a sell through rate of 2%.

Now try to imagine what I might be able to do with it? Especially if you knew I'm a stakeholder for ReInventHR.org, and that rebranding is becoming a big deal everywhere you turn.

Finally, i haven't said that you're wrong, but I am saying there's a better way, or at a minimum another way to succeed at this game......stay tuned

 

[ThatNameGuy]

Domainers only sell ~1-2% of domains on average a year simply because of the relatively fixed number of new businesses looking for domains each year versus the number of domains being held by domainers.

It's pretty straighforward math despite not knowing the precise numbers

Basically there are 330 million domains in existance.
Of which there are XX million held by domainers.

Then there are +XX million new businesses/products requiring domains each year
Also factoring in -XX million businesses/products folding and letting their domains expire
Giving a net of +X million domains required per year

Most of those X millions will be hand registrations.

While leaves maybe 500,000 end-user aftermarket sales ($x,xxx+)?
(complete guess, I honestly don't know .. i'm simply putting numbers for the sake of showing the formula)

If all domainers and aftermarket marketplaces combined hold 25 million domains, then that would be 2%.

My numbers are likely way off as I'm completely guesstimating to get to 2% .. but it gives you an idea of the overall formula. The fact is that 2% number could be off by a significant number.

While the X's are not precisely known, the overall numbers are relatively stable with obvious growth year over year as the world continues to get online.

Most definitely ICANN and Verisign could be doing things to bring more awareness and accessibility to stimulate growth. But at the end of the day we're talking a difference of max 5%. Definitely significant .. but negligible on the 2%/98% scale, as even a strong global domain marketing campaign that impacts the market a massive 5% would increase the 2% to 2.1% ... and that 2% is a complete guesstimate. The factor of error between 1%-2% is 100%, which totally overshadows the 5% in question. And frankly that "2%" could be even far less than 1% giving an even bigger margin of error.

But whether Verisign or anyone else call us cybersquatters or hoarders has zero relevance on the global demand for domains.

Even then the number of domains sold has nothing to do with profit or success. Some domainers sell domains at 100x, others at 10x, some at 2x, and some often sell at a loss. Then those sales need to be countered by costs (renewals/acquisitions). Which is why this whole discussion really doesn't change much for individuals.

@ThatDomainGuy is talking like ~98% of domains not getting sold each year is something negative ... when in fact it's completely natural. It's simply a market fact. It has extremely little to do with anything internal within the domain industry, and is simply a result of the progression of the global economy getting on the Internet.

It's actually a complete lack of understanding of where the demand for domains comes from that would make anyone think the number of domains purchased each year could really be influenced by something so insignificant as the domain industry compared to the driving engine of the $80 TRILLION global economy.


Bottom line is:

1- Domainers ironically have virtually zero influence on the actual demand for domains.

2- But all that is completely irrelevant and meaningless because each domainer has their own system and unique portfolios. So whether their overall relative sell-through of their portfolio is 1%, 2%, 5% or 10+% it really does matter at all. What does matter, is that whatever their number, that it works with their acquisition/costs vs revenue model.

A personally appropriate sell-through percentage can vary wildly based on average acquisition price vs average sales price. If you buy very low and sell at 100x, then you don't ever need anything close to 2% to be profitable. But if you sell at 5x then you need significantly higher than 2% annual sell-through to even start to make a profit.


Whatever the magic number (let's assume 2%), whether the remaining 98% are amazing or "deplorable" really doesn't come into play.

However where @ThatDomainGuy's original statement shows to be decisively wrong, is that I think it's fairly safe to say that many domains found within the 98% in previous years most certainly do sell in future years. It's not like domainers sell 2%, then the next year only sell a newly acquired 2%, while the same 98% continue to never sell year after year.

Fact is most of the domains that exist are horrible. Be they in use by end-users or held by domainers. There is no major alarming excess of "deplorable domains" held by domainers vs the deplorable domains hand registered by new end-users.


And that's my 2 cents on the ~2%!

First, you give absolutely zero evidence or provide any sources to back up this statement;

"]Domainers only sell ~1-2% of domains on average a year simply because of the relatively fixed number of new businesses looking for domains each year versus the number of domains being held by domainers."

I suggest you go back and read Josytal post followed by internet.domains post. Then think about what they said for a while Ategy.

I said I have my own suspicions why so few registered domains sell each year, and the main reason is that "end users" never see them due to the nature of the beast called the domain industry. I've said it before and I'll say it again, "end users" have never heard of the likes of a Sedo, a Uniregistry or an Undeveloped. And changing their names to "Uni" or "Dan" just doesn't cut it.

Hell, most people, to include "end users" don't even know the difference between a registry and a registrar. I know first hand this to be true because I never knew any of this until I met Rob Monster of Epik (online), and found the NP site back in November of 2017. Prior to that, all I'd ever heard about was GoDaddy and Network Solutions.

For a better perspective, it's like a realtor listing a home for sale in the mountains of West Virginia, then putting a big sign in the front yard in the middle of the woods and hoping that someone deer hunting might just stumble on the house, then telling all his buddies when he gets back to camp that he didn't kill a deer, but he did see this beautiful home for sale

That's all I got, but this sure is a lot of fun

 

[frank-germany]

I've spent a little time reviewing your blog, Franks F1lter.com (now there's a crappy name), ... and I must say, I'm not impressed I'd share some constructive criticism with each of you, but none of you could afford me.

F1lter.com is actually the crappiest name I could come up with
that somehow makes sense

as I didn't want somebody to offer me xx.xxx usd
and tease me to ruin the system in selling it


and yes you are right this is my portpolio
quite impressive I guess

more than 1 million names
regged in the last 10 days


that's what I would call impressive, man


and really you are right
I can't afford your advice

as I need somebody with 20/20 vision

 

[ThatNameGuy]

F1lter.com is actually the crappiest name I could come up with
that somehow makes sense

as I didn't want somebody to offer me xx.xxx usd
and tease me to ruin the system in selling it


and yes you are right this is my portpolio
quite impressive I guess

more than 1 million names
regged in the last 10 days


that's what I would call impressive, man


and really you are right
I can't afford your advice

as I need somebody with 20/20 vision

So you do read my crap? LMAO

 

[Windoms]

My sincere apologies to @ThatDomainGuy .. I obviously meant @ThatNameGuy (formerly Baloney)

It is not baloney LOL but Bulloney.
You did that on purpose.
And I laughed a lot.

 

[Windoms]

@ThatNameGuy I remember you from last year.
You talked about some golf tournament where you were going to advertise your .golf names I believe.
I took you seriously then despite all the winds that were blowing against you, I like innovative people but I haven't heard anything from you since.
How did that event go down?

 

[ThatNameGuy]

@ThatNameGuy I remember you from last year.
You talked about some golf tournament where you were going to advertise your .golf names I believe.
I took you seriously then despite all the winds that were blowing against you, I like innovative people but I haven't heard anything from you since.
How did that event go down?

Yes, it was the Myrtle Beach World Amateur that was attended by almost 3,000 golfers from around the world. Donuts, the registry for .Golf was to co-host the both with me, but they cancelled. About that time Paul Stahura, CEO left the company and everything was put on hold. I have even more reason now to attend a USGA sponsored golf event now that I've come up with a unique idea how to attract more people/players to the game. My next trade show venture will be to have a booth at realty/builders convention.sometime late this fall....maybe November.

And you're right, it is Bulloney and not Baloney. I did attend Namescon in Vegas in late January, and met a lot of industry leaders, but didn't learn much new that I didn't already know. That's it Windoms....stay cool, and enjoy life.

 

[hawkeye]

that should give you enough criticism to last you until the farting cows come home! lol

LOL. Too funny!

I have my own suspicions why so few registered domains sell each year, and the main reason is that "end users" never see them due to the nature of the beast called the domain industry. I've said it before and I'll say it again, "end users" have never heard of the likes of a Sedo, a Uniregistry or an Undeveloped. And changing their names to "Uni" or "Dan" just doesn't cut it.

Oh please do tell how 'you' can/will/do/make/provide that better platform than any of the above and how soon that you will bring that to market so endusers will find it and available domains, and how it'll increase the domain sell thru rates for all to enjoy. An 'actual' plan/vision would be appreciated and not a redundant history of how successful you've been in the past , or your typical off-subject nonsensical retorts. That is 'if' you actually have one!

 

[frank-germany]

So you do read my crap? LMAO

just when you post BS about me

ignore feature is an on / off feature

on again

 

[hawkeye]

I never knew any of this until I met Rob Monster of Epik (online), and found the NP site back in November of 2017

Ahhh, now we know who's at fault for you being here. "NO soup for Rob!"

 

[ThatNameGuy]

LOL. Too funny!


Oh please do tell how 'you' can/will/do/make/provide that better platform than any of the above and how soon that you will bring that to market so endusers will find it and available domains, and how it'll increase the domain sell thru rates for all to enjoy. An 'actual' plan/vision would be appreciated and not a redundant history of how successful you've been in the past , or your typical off-subject nonsensical retorts. That is 'if' you actually have one!

LOL. Too funny!


Oh please do tell how 'you' can/will/do/make/provide that better platform than any of the above and how soon that you will bring that to market so endusers will find it and available domains, and how it'll increase the domain sell thru rates for all to enjoy. An 'actual' plan/vision would be appreciated and not a redundant history of how successful you've been in the past , or your typical off-subject nonsensical retorts. That is 'if' you actually have one!

Kevin...i just got around to checking you out, for I sometimes learn a lot from my critics While I wasn't impressed with Name Innovations, I really do like your marketplace for Brandable Names, especially compared with Margot's BrandBucket. Stick around a little while, and you may learn something new

 

[Josytal]

I said I have my own suspicions why so few registered domains sell each year, and the main reason is that "end users" never see them due to the nature of the beast called the domain industry. I've said it before and I'll say it again, "end users" have never heard of the likes of a Sedo, a Uniregistry or an Undeveloped. And changing their names to "Uni" or "Dan" just doesn't cut it.

Now I can see where you were heading. Exposure.

Truth be told, most average domains won't and don't sell due to lack of exposure on established marketplaces. Even if potential buyers know about and visit the marketplaces for their next domain needs, without paying premium fees, average domains have slim chances of making it to the shortlist, talk less of selling profitably (if at all they sell).

Not quite long, elsewhere on NP, I shed some light on possible technical solutions to the problem. Going from simple to complex.

Still on exposure. To make things even worse, with GDPR now enforced, registrant's contact details in domain WHOIS are no longer available to the public. So, henceforth it's not enough to have a good domain name with the hope that potential buyers will contact you through the WHOIS data. Nope! We are now tasked to do more.

@ThatNameGuy , maybe you should edit the title of the post to something more friendly and challenging, for example, "Why Your Domains are Not Selling" and let guys out their share their valuable experience on how to break the 1-2% sell-through "jinx", although I believe @Ategy.com has already posited a lot of insightful, thought-provoking inferences.

 

[Windoms]

@ThatNameGuy Your method for gaining exposure is not foolish in theory. But instead of your own names, wouldn't it be interesting to have Media Options grade names displayed at events? I have no idea how the partnership would be done neither am I saying you should deal with that company. I am only talking about the quality of domain names.

Btw Media Options domain newsletter shows domains and prices.

Like July 2nd
doors.com $499,000
BTCmanagement $25,000
nanny.app $4,000.
etc..

 

[Dondomainer]

If just 1-2% of a domain portfolio sells annually, why do the remaining domains NOT sell? Are they just deplorable domains, or are there other reasons? I have my own suspicions, but I would like to hear from some of the so called professionals in the business. Thanks,

I am not pro, but never take as reference the interest of others for your domain...

For example,

1 - I try to sell without success on sedo.com some domain for $500.(no sales)

2 - I have tried to sell here without success many domains for between 100 and 500 (no sales)

Then, in less than a year they have been sold directly to my inbox between 1K and 2500k.

Sometimes you just need time, investigate what you have, and keep those that you know about which you have an opportunity.

I dont talk about brandable domains unless they are very cool..I speak of domains directly related to an industry.

 

[ThatNameGuy]

Now I can see where you were heading. Exposure.

Truth be told, most average domains won't and don't sell due to lack of exposure on established marketplaces. Even if potential buyers know about and visit the marketplaces for their next domain needs, without paying premium fees, average domains have slim chances of making it to the shortlist, talk less of selling profitably (if at all they sell).

Not quite long, elsewhere on NP, I shed some light on possible technical solutions to the problem. Going from simple to complex.

Still on exposure. To make things even worse, with GDPR now enforced, registrant's contact details in domain WHOIS are no longer available to the public. So, henceforth it's not enough to have a good domain name with the hope that potential buyers will contact you through the WHOIS data. Nope! We are now tasked to do more.

@ThatNameGuy , maybe you should edit the title of the post to something more friendly and challenging, for example, "Why Your Domains are Not Selling" and let guys out their share their valuable experience on how to break the 1-2% sell-through "jinx", although I believe @Ategy.com has already posited a lot of insightful, thought-provoking inferences.

Now I can see where you were heading. Exposure.

Truth be told, most average domains won't and don't sell due to lack of exposure on established marketplaces. Even if potential buyers know about and visit the marketplaces for their next domain needs, without paying premium fees, average domains have slim chances of making it to the shortlist, talk less of selling profitably (if at all they sell).

Not quite long, elsewhere on NP, I shed some light on possible technical solutions to the problem. Going from simple to complex.

Still on exposure. To make things even worse, with GDPR now enforced, registrant's contact details in domain WHOIS are no longer available to the public. So, henceforth it's not enough to have a good domain name with the hope that potential buyers will contact you through the WHOIS data. Nope! We are now tasked to do more.

@ThatNameGuy , maybe you should edit the title of the post to something more friendly and challenging, for example, "Why Your Domains are Not Selling" and let guys out their share their valuable experience on how to break the 1-2% sell-through "jinx", although I believe @Ategy.com has already posited a lot of insightful, thought-provoking inferences.

Thanks Josy...or should i call you Joseph? You're right...this thread should have been titled "Why Your Domains are Not Sellling" You're also right about "exposure" being the key which has been my point all along. What i do know is, i can have the best web marketplace with some of the best domain and brand names in the world and i still may not break the 1-2% sell-through "jinx" as you refer to it.

It stands to reason that if you get twice the exposure, it would result in twice the sales. I also think "price" and "terms" have a lot to do with increased sales as well. Employing the KISS principle, and while all my domains are "hand registered" I'm setting just one price for "domains" and another price for "brand names". What I've noticed about most of the marketplaces is that prices are all over the place. I understand the reasoning behind it, but it creates a level of confusion with a "end user" consumer that's not necessary imho.

Finally, once my sites for DomainGourmet and BrandWik are developed, I plan on strategically developing email marketing strategies and industry specific trade show strategies to get more exposure. To give you an example....i own a domain, Johnson.homes that i hand reg'd for just $10. I know there are literally hundreds if not thousands of builders and realtors around the world with the last name Johnson, some of who would luv to own the domain Johnson.homes. All that's needed is exposure, and that's what I plan to provide.....make sense?

Thanks for chiming in Josy...i think we can share some good ideas here and i'm looking forward to sharing my ideas with others

 

[artstar]

why do you think big players own 8000 domains plus?? there has to be a few in that pile to sell to pay the rereg fees . its simply the odds

 

[ThatNameGuy]

why do you think big players own 8000 domains plus?? there has to be a few in that pile to sell to pay the rereg fees . its simply the odds

While i just own 1,500 domains, i can certainly see myself owning 8,000. I have a couple hundred pages of domains (about 50 to a page) that would be fine for any number of business startups.What I find interesting is that some businesses with deplorable names succeed, while businesses with great names fail.....go figure. I just finished writing this for a friend:

About Brands and Branding – “KISS Principle”

So why would you name your company “Apple”? or “Amazon”? How about “KISS”? We’ve discovered if you ask 10 different “so called” professionals what a brand or branding is about, you’ll get 10 different answers.

Brands have been around for centuries. You were branded before you left the hospital, a la your birth certificate Here at xxxxx xxxxxxx we subscribe to the “KISS” principle that by many standards means “Keep it Simple Stupid”. By other standards “KISS” is one of the top rock bands of all time. So as an interesting test, we decided to key KISS.com to see where it might lead us? Guess what, KISS.com takes you to a dating site. Well, that sort of makes sense, doesn’t it?

Like beauty being in the eyes of the beholder, so are brands. Because single word names like Apple, Amazon and KISS are gone, most single word type brands are misspellings like TAKL, or consist of two keywords like BrandAmerica™. You’ll find both types of brand names here on our website, but in case you don’t, we promise to find one for you.

These words are moot if no one is reading them. They need exposure as do your domains and your brands. Opportunity abounds in this industry....seize the opportunity