information .LINK binge progress

[ThatNameGuy]

Sorry to have to start another thread regarding .LINK, but i wasn't able to answer questions "if" there was a "link" of any kind in the text of the post/message I was responding to.

I was able to hand register slightly more than a thousand names with about 20 of them being "Premium" names that sold for $116 each, and one that I purchased for $478, the corresponding .com is valued at $8,800,000.

Since a host of individuals have confirmed that, ".LINK is no worse than .XYZ", I just knew .link was a good alternative to .com and a good rival for .xyz

Curious anyone? Lets have some fun

 

[bmugford]

What do you mean? People love non-intuitive brands! They're super accessible and desirable.

We can all hash it out in the new user group which is definitely being created. When Rich says he's going to do something, he does it! No false starts here, just 100% pure follow-through.

Speaking of that @ThatNameGuy, how is your lawsuit going? I forgot who you were suing was it Verisign, GoDaddy, and/or some other party?

I have been staying tuned, much to your chagrin, but surprisingly have not seen any updates about it.

As Joe pointed out, you are well known to follow-through so I must have just missed it.

Please give us an update!

Brad

 

[bmugford]

I am looking forward to the ".LINK sales progress" thread.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

You would think. And yet.....

Well, just imagine I posted a picture of crickets.

Top 10 list of .LINK sales -

1. NDA
2. NDA
3. NDA
4. NDA
5. NDA
6. NDA
7. NDA
8. NDA
9. NDA
10. NDA

 

[Joe N]

i'm thinking of starting a domain consulting business, and i thought I might call it "Domain Consulting".

Kind of a "those who can't do, teach" scenario?

 

[DrJacoby]

How stupid do you think I am

Bigly.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

The fact that there are "technically", as in from a tech perspective, no differences between between .link and .com really is a pointless argument to make.

If that was the main deciding factor for investing in a domain then this forum wouldn't exist and we'd all pack up and go home.

It's like making the argument about the roundness of the dot being the same for all domains...

 

[MadAboutDomains]

PremiumDomains.link which is no worse than Premium.link.

Do you really think that? If so you're in the wrong game

 

[jim h]

I like .link, which changed its owner this year, I think it is an extension in line with the spirit of the Internet. Earlier this year, we confirmed the large amount transaction about link.link, which is encouraging.

Although according the information of namepros, the trading volume of link has not increased significantly, and the registration volume is also very stable. I choose to invest in .link and .xyz. I think they both have opportunities in the future.

 

[MediaCode]

The fact that you have found so many one-word .link domain names available for hand registration in 2022 is not good from an investment standpoint. For all intents and purposes, the extension is "dead on arrival" for an investor – there is little to no interest in the extension by end users.

It's the same with .ag. Look at all these great SLDs available for hand reg in .ag and how long they've been available for hand reg. Nobody has hand-regged them because there is hardly any end user market for them. Just because they are available for registration does not mean they should be registered, at least from an investment standpoint. Sometimes, it's better to let sleeping dogs lie.

The situation for .link is not much prettier, with plenty of great SLDs available for hand reg for years:

Hardly any end users (and investors!) want to acquire .link domain names from domain name investors these days. To throw good money at .link domain names today is wild and rampant speculation, not value investment (e.g., acquiring domain names at prices well below their intrinsic values to end users). With .link, the risk is too high with too little reward. As an investment portfolio or a TLD tranche within an investment portfolio, .link is a negative ROI opportunity to be avoided.

For transparency, we do have one .link in our portfolio: sportsbetting.link. It was available for hand registration less than two weeks ago. That SLD should not have been available for hand reg if the TLD were investable. We took it on as a wild speculation and we have expectations of negative returns accordingly. We fully understand we are likely to let it drop unsold within the next two to three years. Meanwhile, we are happy to be surprised by a gambling industry executive that goes crazy late one night after four glasses of wine and drunkenly decides to grab it at our BIN price. The odds of that happening are extremely low, and the house (the registrar) will likely win (again) in the end.

 

[Joe N]

Know who would really be into .link? This guy:

 

[Joe N]

Link the Sink.

 

[Joe N]

i have it from a pretty reliable source the unveiling of the new .LINK will occur in the next 60 days. The binge buying continues with; Showcasing.link

Thar be gold in them thar hills!!

 

[MadAboutDomains]

If you understood anything at all about "POTENTIAL" or Risk vs. Reward you might understand. My life has been enriched in so many ways because of my education.....and good luck to you too.

I do understand those things, I've been in domaining long enough. Just don't waste your money on domains like bastard.link...

 

[Bob Hawkes]

***My Apology***​

Bob....i'll have to go back and check, but I don't recall this being from a "private email" you sent me? Was it from a private email you sent someone else? I

My sincere apology @ThatNameGuy - I should have checked more carefully. I had thought that it was from the email exchange we had when you related who the purchaser of .link was, but it was not from that email.

I wrote the paragraph you quoted in a public reply to you on NamePros on May 23 -- https://www.namepros.com/threads/binge-buying-and-link.1273937/post-8604847

I should have checked more carefully, and my sincere apology.

It does not change the fact that what I was saying in the quoted paragraph is that .link was, in my opinion, far better than the other auctioned former Uniregistry TLDs (.audio, .auto .blackfriday, .car, .cars, .christmas, .click, .diet, .flowers, .game, .gift, .guitars, .help,.hiphop, .hiv, .hosting, .juegos, .lol, .mom, .photo, .pics, .property, .sexy, and .tattoo) just because .link is potentially useable by a much larger pool of end users. Without checking all the others, I am pretty sure .link has more registrations and a larger aftermarket sales volume. So yes, I think it is the best of the auctioned TLDs.

In the comment linked above, to a rather long post in total, I did also provide a link to sales of .link domains, and point out that it's abuse rating was favourable.

Anyway, I mainly wanted to apologize to readers for being incorrect about the source of the quote, and to @TheNameGuy in particular. I'm sorry.

Bob

 

[MadAboutDomains]

Just picked up Linkusers.link

That wallet needs restraining.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

Thanks Joe.....Nursing.link is being considered by one of our local medical schools, EVMS. You may recall i use to be in the medical billing business and the "users group" for Acsel was one of the keys to our success. Do you know how many nursing schools and nurses there are in the world?....how about just Canada? btw, are you aware how much DAN.com is asking for Nursing.xyz? I know you won't check it out, but it's pretty damn important if you're to play in my game

I want to be positive but I'm struggling to cut through the guff.

Nursing.link is a good name for a nursing school...... Probably. If they have a use for it. Are they likely to pay top dollar for something like this if they are a school? I thought schools were pretty conservative with their budgets so that they could maximise the teaching aspect.

Nursing.xyz price is of no relevance to this, it is a private individual who we know prices their domains high.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

I'm curious Brad, how much do you think Cardiology.link is worth considering Cardiology.com is for sale for over a million dollars?

One does not have any influence the other.

My future domain purchase bobbadingdongflubbawubba.com will be for sale for 100 million billion dollars if you want it, doesn't make the equivalent .link worth the same, or not.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

Considering that .LINK is no worse than .com

It's a lot worse, who told you it's no worse than .com?

 

[MadAboutDomains]

KeepGrowinglink......a lot like KeepSurfing™. Again, don't be so sensitive MAD.......Profitfrom.link

"why would they endorse it and how?"

1. Maybe because "link" is a "keyword" valued by Go Daddy @ $1,898
2. Maybe because a link in technical terms provides for a connection to a website etc.
3. Maybe because Linkedin is proud of their name as are their 810 Million members
4. Maybe because .LINK is a viable alternative for .com
5. Maybe because it actually describes an action that links/connects two sources
6. Maybe because it adds both value and profit for each source

With regards to the how? now that remains to be seen, but from past experience i render it DOABLE.link

And the domain name they would use is............? Linkedin.link? Sounds horrible!!

 

[Joe N]

I'm sure there's one or two sales that can be added to that thread already surely. It's a binge so lots of domains means lots of sales even if it's just a small percentage.

You would think. And yet.....

Well, just imagine I posted a picture of crickets.

 

[Joe N]

Top 10 list of .LINK sales -

1. NDA
2. NDA
3. NDA
4. NDA
5. NDA
6. NDA
7. NDA
8. NDA
9. NDA
10. NDA

 

[Joe N]

Joe...you may have read that I've done some guest lecturing at a local university. Not all, but most of my lecturing involves ENTREPRENEURSHIP. While I'm not sure about Canada, i know here in the states one can start a business on the proverbial shoestring......i know because I've done it dozens of times

That's not surprising at all. You talk quite a lot on here about the projects that you're "starting".

 

[MadAboutDomains]

.link does exactly the same as .com and is "no less worse than .com" except for only a few differences, those being as follows:

- People have heard of .com
- People trust .com to mean the website they are visiting is likely to be legitimate
- People know and recognise that .com means it's a website address for the internet

So basically the same, just a few teething issues to overcome to make it no less worse and then it'll be like rocket fuel for the masses.

 

[Joe N]

.link does exactly the same as .com and is "no less worse than .com" except for only a few differences, those being as follows:

- People have heard of .com
- People trust .com to mean the website they are visiting is likely to be legitimate
- People know and recognise that .com means it's a website address for the internet

So basically the same, just a few teething issues to overcome to make it no less worse and then it'll be like rocket fuel for the masses.

His plan is to single-handedly alter global awareness and perception of .link (and .online, and .homes), thereby creating a surge in demand for his non-premium, multi-word, new TLD names.

So, you know, it shouldn't be too difficult.

 

[Joe N]

I'm guessing you went to the site to see what i was referring to? I don't know what they paid for PingPong.gives, but again you missed the point Joe. Like our friend Mad About Domains said, ".link does exactly the same as .com" You need only replace the the .link with .gives and you get the same result.

I know you're doing your best to discredit me Joe, but you should know by now it's a hard job. My advice to you is to try and be a bit more open minded. Don't you just envy the opportunity I have to teach potential "end users" just how fu*ked up the domain industry truly is.....and to think I have Verisign on my side

It's actually you who missed the point: it doesn't matter that they do the same thing. As a domain investor (which you are), all that matters is what someone will pay you for your names. I'm glad the ping pong site worked out well, but I bet that charity paid reg fee for their domain name.