"Is the Domain Aftermarket Corrupt?"

[Ms Domainer]

*

On my blog MsDomainer [dot] com (which is currently somewhat inactive), I just received the following comment on "Is the Domain Aftermarket Corrupt?" a October 7, 2007, post. In that post, I questioned the ethics of the domain aftermarket and how domains are captured and sold. My view now is slightly different than it was back then, although the halvarez scandal hasn't helped. I don't want to include the link here because it might appear that I'm trying to self promote my blog. Besides, due to my current circumstances, I haven't been updating much lately.

Offended, I was about to hit the "reject" button, but, then, I got to thinking, why censor what most people outside of domaining are really thinking?

You are all scum so you deserve whatever reaming you get by the other sharks in the fetid pool of murk you swim in. Purchasing any domain without the intention of starting a valid enterprise under that name and putting a website online at that address, is sleazy on par with real estate scams, spammers, and pyramid-scheme lowlifes.​

I realize that this is one view who happened upon my blog. But I do think that outside this industry, we ARE considered scum.

My question to all: how might this industry go about changing this negative viewpoint of legitimate domaining?

*

 

[bmugford]

Legitimate domainers need to take a harder stance against true cybersquatters. There is a big difference between dealing in generics and brandables than clear TM domains.

I also wish companies like GoDaddy.com would spend some money explaining the actual benefits of owning a domain name. The cute SB Ads might have worked to launch GD as a brand, but it is time to grow up. These companies with massive budgets need to step up and bring an understanding of the domain market to a wider audience.

It also doesn't help that drop sites like NJ/Pool prominently feature obvious TM issue domains on their main page.

Then you have people who register and ask for appraisals on domains like

MichaelJacksonDeathPhotos.com

If you are a legitimate domainer, it is basically the same thing as owning undeveloped lots that are ready to be built on. It is a big difference than the shady tactics that many people use.

This whole thing reminds me of an argument the other day a friend had with an end user for a product generic. He basically said something like "You are paying $7/year, why should I pay $500". Many end users don't understand the benefits of owning relevant domains.

Brad

 

[wwwweb]

purchasing a generic domain name without the intention of building a website, same as purchasing a piece of land without the intention of building a house? what does it matter owners choice.

 

[enlytend]

I've posted about domaining's image problems (and the repercussions they could have on our industry as a whole!) numerous times, here and elsewhere. How to fix it?

1) Do the right thing, Stop the unethical behavior Typosquats, DELIBERATE tm infringement, registering tragedy domains to sell, etc. ... Don't do it, don't condone it, actively speak out against it.

This goes for the registrars too!

2) A Little PR Wouldn't Hurt. - Are you a domainer doing something to make the world a better place? Involved in your community? Write a press release. Donate some domains to a charity? Write a press release. Do something to clean up the industry? Write a press release.

Here's another thought - everyone's developing domains these days, right?

3) Develop a domain for a good cause. Devote at least one domain out of your portfolio to helping others. And don't stick Adsense all over it!

Domainer "Do Some Good" Challenge:
Putting my money where my mouth is, I have several domains in my portfolio that I registered with the above intent but never got around to it. I'm going to get something online on one of them by the end of this month. No advertising, a purely not-for-profit resource site. You heard it here.

Calling all you folks who can churn out minisites in less time than it takes to run down an iPod battery - Anyone with me?

 

[bmugford]

I have donated several domains to charity over the last couple years, especially Medical related terms (diseases) to non profits or support groups as well as animal rescue related terms. However, in my opinion a press release on a donation is a little tacky.

It reminds me of a couple years ago when some company donated $10,000 in bottled water during Katrina, then spent like $10M promoting it.

Brad

2) A Little PR Wouldn't Hurt. Donate some domains to a charity?

 

[abc3200]

purchasing a generic domain name without the intention of building a website, same as purchasing a piece of land without the intention of building a house? what does it matter owners choice.

This is exactly my opinion. While there are some differences between domaining and real estate investing, they are fundamentally the same in my opinion. One of the primary differences, and one that contributes largely to a negative view of domaining, is the fact that you need a lot more money to invest in real estate. Domaining is open to anyone. I think that is one of the great things about domaining, but, of course, those in power already don't like when opportunities are available to the masses.

 

[enlytend]

I have donated several domains to charity over the last couple years, especially Medical related terms (diseases) to non profits or support groups as well as animal rescue related terms. However, in my opinion a press release on a donation is a little tacky.

It is ... somewhat

I'm not talking a big paid advertising campaign - just getting some positive information out to counteract the negative perceptions. Doesn't have to be a formal press release - any way to get the message out will do, little by little.

 

[Ms Domainer]

*

Another idea:

Create a group that adheres to a domaining code of ethics, to be developed by that group and voted upon. If you agree, then the annual Membership fee would be nominal but adherence to the code would be strict. Being a member would tell the outside world and the industry that you are an ethical domainer who can be trusted.

This would NOT be another ICA, whose mission had little to do with ethics but more with protecting the special interests of the rich domainer. This code of ethics group would be more interested in promoting and protecting the good name of domainers, via their deeds when conducting business and their charity events.

Figuring out that ethical code could be contentious, though I would say a good start would be to begin with the legalities and then decide what gray areas are too gray to be acceptable (recognizing that what is legal is not always ethical. Conversely, what is ethical is not always legal).

Thoughts?

*

 

[enlytend]

I like it.

But I agree - working out the details would be very difficult. I've thought this over a few times myself and have come up against the same problem. Even something seemingly black-and-white like trademarks - for example, if it's a descriptive mark and you don't solicit the mark owner or compete in the same class of goods and services there's nothing illegal OR unethical about that.

Besides, everyone thinks their "gray" area is a lighter shade of gray than the next person's .

One possibility might be to have a simple "core" set of values and a viewable individual "policies" profile for each member, with additional details about that member's business / domaining practices. Not as things to be enforced, but to provide consumers with information and disclosure.

???

 

[ComKid]

I believe, in addition, we need more quality online venues to promote the market of domain names as well as changes with ICANN regulations for preventative TM registrations.

There are plenty of news sources, websites, blogs and feeds ect..... but there are no peer forces to educate and promote domaining in ways that reflects the true nature of this remarkable industry. There is no media direction like you see with buying and selling stocks or real estate.... like you see in those markets.

This industry needs to stand back and take a fresh look at the direction it should be moving in and invest in new ways to promote these properties. There are handfuls of experts in this industry but not many on par with the professionalism of other commodity markets or the real estate markets from what I can see.

 

[DubDubDubDot]

First of all, more domainers need to realize the true reasons why the domain community it is looked down upon.

Nobody except those directly affected care if domainers register a TM or a typo or a tragedy domain, yet these kind of threads always cite these activities as being the image problem. They aren't.

What non-domainers do care about (and what makes developers want to toss every domainer off a bridge) is wanting a domain that isn't really all that great, yet the domainer won't sell it for less than $1,500. That sort of thing is what has prevented the domain aftermarket from becoming legitimate.

Mark my words.... We are headed down a path where WIPO is going to start taking domains away based solely on them being owned by a domainer with no intentions to develop them. They might not cite that as the reason for transfer, but they will pull some other reason out of their hat. There have already been some recent cases where it sure looked like this may have been the case.

 

[fm1234]

There are people who just like to criticise. There are people who like to criticise, but don't like to research the facts beforehand.

Some people think all salesmen are scum. Some people think certain types of salesmen (insurance, or cars, or real estate, or whatever) are scum. Some people think contractors are all sleazy, all lawyers chase ambulances, landscapers are all Mexican and plumbers all have exposed ass cracks. People who want to wallow in their own ignorance are more than welcome to do so.

As far as whether or not WIPO could conceivably start taking away domains based on presumptive intent, I bet my lawyer (and anybody else in this industry's lawyer) would love to be the lead counsel on the class action lawsuit to stop that. There's no basis in legality (hell, no basis in reality) for them to successfully do something like that. If there was, then the real estate, gemstone, printing and other markets are all in deep trouble, because "failure to intend" applies to all of them and more.


Frank

 

[enlytend]

What non-domainers do care about (and what makes developers want to toss every domainer off a bridge) is wanting a domain that isn't really all that great, yet the domainer won't sell it for less than $1,500. That sort of thing is what has prevented the domain aftermarket from becoming legitimate.

Agree 100%. And being a developer first and domainer second, I've cursed those out a few times myself. (If I make a respectable offer for a domain and you come back with an outrageous price, you'd better have other buyers knocking at your door or really want to keep it, because it's never gonna happen.).

But I believe the other factors still contribute to the image problem because of the media attention they attract.

 

[Ms Domainer]

*

I can own an acre in the dumpiest part of town, but if someone else wants it bad enough (for example, for a parking lot), I can ask whatever I want, but the potential buyer can simply refuse and find another plot of land.

Asking and getting are two different things, and, soon enough, if the owner wants to sell, he/she will have to temper his/her expectations.

On the other hand, perhaps the seller is more interested in holding with the hope that some private investors are planning to renew the area with tony shops, hotels, and business.

He/she has every right to hold, and no one seems to question that business model.

Why should it be any different for domaining? True, we do deal in intangible assets. One can see, feel, taste, smell, and hear a plot of land to determine its desireability by noting the part of town and other tangible factors. It doesn't help that "words" are simply characters that have been designated with certain meanings--they don't "bling" on your ring finger, you can't eat them, and you can't build your dream house on them (at least not literally). So ordinary people just don't see the value in certain words. To them, dictionary words are ordinary pieces of language, just for the purpose of communicating with each other.

But we need to educate the public and business world that garnering the best possible keyword(s) for one's domain should be considered as a significant acquisition, which will then translate into a major asset.

I do believe that our image is seriously in the dump; we can't change ICANN, and we can't change the auction platforms, but we can change the way that others see us by accepting some ethical standards to the way we do business and rejecting those "domainers" who would cybersquat on someone else's brand, etc.

*

 

[fm1234]

posted by enlytend:

posted by DubDubDubDot:

What non-domainers do care about (and what makes developers want to toss every domainer off a bridge) is wanting a domain that isn't really all that great, yet the domainer won't sell it for less than $1,500. That sort of thing is what has prevented the domain aftermarket from becoming legitimate.

Agree 100%. And being a developer first and domainer second, I've cursed those out a few times myself. (If I make a respectable offer for a domain and you come back with an outrageous price, you'd better have other buyers knocking at your door or really want to keep it, because it's never gonna happen.).

Why? Of all attitudes about domainers this is the one that baffles me the most. People who own a given thing can ask whatever they want for it. Outrageous asking prices are seen in all kinds of markets -- real estate, collectibles of any kind, gemstones, often in talent contracts (sports, actors, whatever.) Why are domainers in particular to be singled out as bad guys for asking a particular amount of money for a domain?

Don't get me wrong; I see prices being asked for domains and generally laugh until I pee a little. But the idea of making some kind of moral judgement on a person over asking price just seems absurd to me.

I even have a real-life domainer in mind ... he has the .com of a domain for which I have had the .net for two years now. I've checked and checked and checked and his asking price has stayed firm at $30,000 for at least three years. Nothing but a parking page there, and it can't possibly be getting much natural traffic (and he refuses to discuss traffic or rev -- it's $30,000 take it or leave it.) Now, what this guy is, is an incompetent who does not make money at domaining. What he is not, is a bad human being who is bringing down this industry. He's just a dumbass, like anybody else who clings to a misinformed idea of value of a given thing. But it's his domain and he can do what he wants.


Frank

 

[enlytend]

Just to clarify, what I was agreeing with was this:

What non-domainers do care about (and what makes developers want to toss every domainer off a bridge) is wanting a domain that isn't really all that great, yet the domainer won't sell it for less than $1,500.

.... not commenting on the domainer's right to set whatever price they want. Lots of domainers put a lot of time and effort into registering and holding on to every decent domain they can think of - Developers get frustrated when they do domain searches for a new project and find every name THEY think up is parked. Parked to a non-domainer = "not being used".

Perfectly OK for the registrant to ask whatever they want, but nonetheless frustrating to a developer.

 

[Carlton]

On my blog MsDomainer [dot] com (which is currently somewhat inactive), I just received the following comment on "Is the Domain Aftermarket Corrupt?" a October 7, 2007, post. In that post, I questioned the ethics of the domain aftermarket and how domains are captured and sold. My view now is slightly different than it was back then, although the halvarez scandal hasn't helped. I don't want to include the link here because it might appear that I'm trying to self promote my blog. Besides, due to my current circumstances, I haven't been updating much lately.

Offended, I was about to hit the "reject" button, but, then, I got to thinking, why censor what most people outside of domaining are really thinking?

You are all scum so you deserve whatever reaming you get by the other sharks in the fetid pool of murk you swim in. Purchasing any domain without the intention of starting a valid enterprise under that name and putting a website online at that address, is sleazy on par with real estate scams, spammers, and pyramid-scheme lowlifes.​

I realize that this is one view who happened upon my blog. But I do think that outside this industry, we ARE considered scum.

My question to all: how might this industry go about changing this negative viewpoint of legitimate domaining?

This abusive comment signals you are dealing with someone who is not rational and certainly emotionally immature. He/she is not capable of holding a productive conversation. Personally, I would NOT post such comments to my blog.

Most domainers are quite happy to discuss opportunities and even dabate interesting topics with a wide range of people. But there are several prerequisites -> can make valid points, will concede to a better point, have no damaging agenda to push forward, can adopt a civil tone.

Unfortunately, the fellow quoted above is the epitome of the "low life" he claims to despise. Extremely irrational, no credibility, blindly attacking, and unable to discern justified anger from unjustified.

Personally, I suggest saving your time and intelligence for those who are worthy of it! Just my opinion.

 

[SpareDomains]

Negative opinions of domainers are usually from developers that were late to the game and don't have a pot to piss in so they would rather talk trash then provide a reason why if they are such good developers and so successful with their development they can't afford a good domain. Toyota has built one of the most reliable cars for years and one little brake problem and everyone attacks them. When you are on top of anything domains, cars, music, acting etc... people below you will make negative comments at the slightest slip because they are so unhappy with their own life which I call jealousy fueled hate. If your domains are generic and not trademarked there is nothing wrong with just parking them as that is your business and anyone who thinks different needs to find their own business. I still get over $10 clicks on some parked domains and I won't develop them if I have no interest in the category and the answer of develop every domain you own is flawed as development in the wrong hands is not good development. Domainers need to team up with the powerhouses that exist like Sedo and Fabulous & Afternic both have domain distribution networks which get your domains listed for sale across multiple sites, godaddy has free premium listings as well so the options to get your domains in front of the end user public that will pay and not whine are there. Developers that wish to whine need to pick an alternate domain or email the domain owner and strike a partnership deal if they can't afford the domain and they have to have it. I have hundreds of domains parked and I have a good handful of fully developed sites and a few hundred mini sites as well so I mix it up a bit as I think some form of development even if a mini site is a nice defensive measure to use for your best domains. It's hard to get a successful organized domainer association so until that happens I would say keep some cash in the bank so you can make examples out of people that wish to test you if you are holding premium domains. Don't debate with people that don't get it spend that time optimizing your parked domains, developing your mini sites, developing your fully devloped sites and most importantly getting your domains listed for sale in the channels that exist for maximum end user sales potential.

 

[DubDubDubDot]

Why are domainers in particular to be singled out as bad guys for asking a particular amount of money for a domain?

Because outside of domaining, holding many domains for the sole purpose of resale -- especially when they were purchased for regfee -- is not considered legitimate domain ownership by many.

And I think one reason for this is that only domainers consider domains to be internet real-estate. You can own land next to a busy highway and it becomes an "If you build it they will come." scenario because the traffic is right there, but this holds true for only a tiny percentage of domains. The rest require significant development to see any real traffic. So developers look at domains more so as the sign on the store, and they see the "$#@!& domainer" holding their desired brand at bay for a price that far exceeds what the domain is worth to the project.

Now obviously what I'm saying here does not apply to anyone's views of resellers of certified premium domains. Everyone understands why they sell for a lot of money.

If a domainer wants to think "My domain, I'll charge what I want.", that is fine (even I am guilty of it at times). You can do that. Just don't play dumb and blame it on TM registrations or something when domainers don't get any respect.

 

[Kate]

...

I realize that this is one view who happened upon my blog. But I do think that outside this industry, we ARE considered scum.

My question to all: how might this industry go about changing this negative viewpoint of legitimate domaining?

*

When you are successful, or own something that other people covet, you will always be the envy of jealous people.

PS: I would not be surprised if this pissing comment came from a MFA mass producer, you know somebody that definitely adds value to the Internet :wave:

The sad thing is, many people think the same.
For many (ignorant) webmasters, SEOers, domainers are among the top web nuisances - even ahead of spammers.
Of course it's not rational but people are not rational, that's why the world is crazy :gl: