"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?

*

 

[snoop]

That was more true 10 years ago than it is now. Owning a keyword domain provides no ranking guarantees anymore. The weight for the keyword being in the domain is quite small. While that may contradict what 99% of domainers say, it is indeed true.

Most domainers say there is a boost from it, whilst you may say it is small it is still enough of an element that it is the major factor in many domain sales.

---------- Post added at 07:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 PM ----------

A perfect example is when the VC money started to dry up and the startups couldn't afford to spend $10,000 or $50,000 or whatever on a domain anymore. So they made up a 5L or 6L word and got it for regfee. That domain style was born out of developers believing that domainers charge too much, and now it is a perfectly viable option for any developer who shares that belief.

That was always have the vast majority of sites started, reg fee names.

 

[jagdotme]

*

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.​

*

If someone said that to me, I reply and say "if you can't beat them, join them"

Recession Baby LoL

---------- Post added at 05:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:04 AM ----------

As Brad said "Buying and selling domains is a perfectly legitimate business if done the right way."

exactly

 

[DU]

I don't see how buying domains is anything like hoarding toilet paper.

Unlike toilet paper, which is a limited supply, there are basically an unlimited supply or domains (keyword, brandables, extensions). Domains can be created instantly unlike toiler paper.

Ok. So its like hoarding double-ply quilted toilet paper.

Sure, I can go buy single ply... and yeah if I didn't like it, I could go buy a tree and carefully spend a lot of money pulping it into the hand crafted super soft paper of my liking...

but it would be much easier to buy the double ply that you have in your garage stored with the super absorbent kitchen towels.

 

[DU]

When I do a search in google I almost never stumble upon parked pages (they are recognized as such by google and penalized), but often I come across crappy MFA sites. This is the real spam.
Bottom line: domainers are not the top culprits IMO.

I think you're right. I don't often land on parked pages. I view parked / mini-sites as the same set of people. Read the sticky's here at NP. How to monetize - lots of commenting on creating useless sites to cheat google (or cheat people).

I don't blame people for the way they make money if it's legal. I don't like banks, I don't like lawyers, I don't like the police all the time....and I sure as heck didn't like all my teachers growing up. Doesn't mean I begrudge those people the right to try to feed themselves. I have a HUGE issue with the implementation of Patents and TM.. but that's not to say they shouldn't exist.

So equally, I also don't begrudge people the right to be able to change the industry to make it better. Less useless information is better... .but not at the cost of diverse information. It's a balancing act.

Domainers/web monkeys are just in the middle of the battleground. I don't have the answer, I don't care about the answer insofar as it doesn't effect me UNTIL there is an answer that affects the status quo. Then I care (too late?)..

Perhaps thats Ms D's original point not to wait until too late - you all have to work to maintain the status quo because the pendulum is definitely swinging away from you.

 

[VirtualT]

Define 'cybersquatting'?

We are all cybersquatters to some degree, we are holding (squatting on) a bit of cyber real estate until someone comes along who wants to either develop it or sell it on for a profit.

Only when it is (proven to be) someone else's mark does it become unethical/illegal. Half the domains you own could be someones service mark in afrokazisctan. It's all a matter of conscience.

 

[DubDubDubDot]

Googles new caffeine algorithm is no secret that it favors keywords as well so I think the advantage is more than your stated quite small.

What is your source on this?

The Summit study used 9,000 keyword searches and found that having a keyword in the URL made little difference. Only 6% of results on the first three pages had the keyword(s) in the URL. If keyword domains had the SEO advantage that many domainers claim, this number should be much higher.

 

[fm1234]

DubDubDubDot

Keywords in the domain are not a major ranking factor, but like domain age (and the authority it implies) a good keyword domain can be a tipping factor. It is no suprise that only a small number of domains come up as keyword-rich, but I would be very interested to see a more focused analysis of the data which targeted only high-quality keywords from a marketing standpoint -- eg. broad product match, generic services, geolocals etc.

Not really relevant to the discussion, sorry. Just saying as an aside that I would be very interested in seeing that data refined by actual kw quality.


Frank