.com This .com Domain Name Drops 96.7% In Value. Why?

[Tewksbury]

phonemarket .com is currently listed for sale for $5,888.

phonemarket .com sold for $180,000 in March 2012 (on Sedo)

The current sale price ($5,888) represents a 96.7% loss in value over seven years. A loss of this magnitude spooks serious investors and can damage the credibility of the domain name industry by highlighting volatility and irrationality. What happened? What caused this domain name to suffer such a dramatic loss in value?

 

[biggie]

Don you don't get phone market?

nope

some names just don't appeal to me... but do to others
I wouldn't bid on it or backorder it

imo….

 

[jmcc]

I'm not sure that using .APP in a comparison is a good thing. The .APP is a niche gTLD with minimal usage. The .COM is global with decades of recognition.

Regards...jmcc

 

[Windoms]

The sales data and usage shows that would be a profitable investment.

You won't find any serious buyers in 2019. No ones prospering, it's a dying activity and that's why it's for sale so cheap despite being a popular product ending in market.
You'd be outbounding to small hustlers who'd pay a lavish maximum of $1000.
I don't see it ever selling again.
A burden to own.

 

[jmcc]

You won't find any serious buyers in 2019. No ones prospering, it's a dying activity and that's why it's for sale so cheap despite being a popular product ending in market.

Many of the switching and trade-up deals from the telcos have limited the sales of used mobiles. Previously, it might have made sense to sell the mobile to someone else but with the telco offering the latest iPhone deal or Samsung with a trade-in killed a lot of that market.

Regards...jmcc

 

[jmcc]

Handies, always an interesting one.

Germany.

Regards...jmcc

 

[IMEZI]

The 2019 market is a very different market to that of 2012. A 2012 valuation may not make sense in 2019 and some valuations still don't make sense.

Regards...jmcc

indeed!!! internet revolution were changing along with the giant (google etc), the bubble were now bursting out. Brand awarenes were important but that only when the business reaching at certain high point, before that point having or using some expensive .com were useless

 

[BrandEntrance.com]

Buyer pays $188,000 for Crystals.com.

Crystals.app is available for $220 per year.

It would take 854 years of .app registrations (@ current prices) to match the cost the buyer apparently paid for Crystals.com.

Comparing a 10ct Diamond to a 10ct equivalent cubic zirconium by the sounds of it.

 

[Tewksbury]

Comparing a 10ct Diamond to a 10ct equivalent cubic zirconium by the sounds of it.

Hi Jamesall,

Your analogy comparing diamonds (which can be owned) to domain names (which can not be owned) creates a false equivalency between these investments. No need to create unnecessary confusion in the marketplace.

All top-level domains perform an identical function. They appear after-the-last-dot in a domain name, representing the highest level of the Internet’s domain name system hierarchy.

Similarly, all domain names perform an identical function. They’re used to aid human navigation on the network, serving as a proxy for the numerical addressing system of the Internet. Domain names help people understand and remember web addresses. The primary purpose of domain names is brand identity.

Your post appears to be yet another example of how status quo bias favors .com top-level domain. A prodigious percentage of people still believe dot com to be the only viable TLD choice out of 1,200+ other options. This false premise of .com supremacy creates an illusion of scarcity which in turn artificially drives up the price for .com domain names –on the secondary market– at the expense of all other TLDs.

Why settle for a less-than-optimal legacy TLD domain name when other, more secure and brand-able options exist?

 

[ecalc]

.app is where it's @

Yes namebio .app sales database is a $154k juggernaut fast approaching the median value of a US single family home.

A prodigious percentage of people still believe dot com to be the only viable TLD choice out of 1,200+ other options. This false premise of .com supremacy ...

Sometimes the crowd is right and the premise is true. Again, per namebio:
sold last 5 years (USD) = ntld 23.3M, com 527.4M … ntld/com = 4.4%
sold last 12 months = ntld 3.6M, com 112.3M … ntld/com = 3.2%
ntld secondary market cap is shrinking relative to com.

 

[platey]

Most

Domain name investors

Buy domain names and sell them On for a profit etc

Tech venture bods

Have a vision for the domain name and can make an expensive domain worth every penny as they use that domain name to build large companies etc

As a rule domain name investors know that a domain name may be good etc but few will ever be the next Internet sensation because they tend not to have the vision

I have tech venture ideas and I have the vision for my ideas and I own the two keyword. Com of my ideas etc

But I do will never be the next tech venture sensation

Because I can't be bothered lol

 

[ecalc]

Greetings ecalc ...

Normally I lay low but since you asked, my name is ecalc, born in Yankee Stadium in the Bronx NY. My passions are propane and propane accessories. I came out of the NP shadows when they blocked drive by tag writing, shattering my dreams. My current writing centers on pumping dot com and cherry picking supportive data.

Regarding your ‘can own’ real estate vs ‘can’t own’ domains principle, try not paying property tax and you’ll find out who really owns it. If domain sales data is an unfair argument you might not like my ideas about what have you done for me lately or domain parking dairy cows vs termites so I won’t go there. I agree with you about domain utility value (~$1/yr) and competitive price pressure but we probably disagree about mindshare and domain competitive weight classes from heavy weight to ankle biter.

Thank you, carry on.

 

[BrandEntrance.com]

Your post appears to be yet another example of how status quo bias favors .com top-level domain. A prodigious percentage of people still believe dot com to be the only viable TLD choice out of 1,200+ other options. This false premise of .com supremacy creates an illusion of scarcity which in turn artificially drives up the price for .com domain names –on the secondary market– at the expense of all other TLDs.

Why settle for a less-than-optimal legacy TLD domain name when other, more secure and brand-able options exist?

Well... stick around for a bit.

 

[namemarket]

....PhoneMarket .ext registered in 36 extensions.....

I am guessing most of the extensions are taken as a more or less direct result of the hard to believe 180k sale so people grabbed extensions thinking if phonemarket.com was a 180k value maybe their 2nd rate ext was worth a fraction of it say 1% which would still be a substantial $1,800. Now I see phonemarket.com worth only 3 figures and the other extensions (now worth maybe $18) still reg'd possibly due to being on auto-renew for years.

 

[Tewksbury]

https://twitter.com/hashtag/Landllocked?src=hash

Seriously? Your response is a Twitter hashtag -with only two tweets from a self-appointed monarch whose claim-to-fame is selling Porno[.com] for seven figures. Did you know your King has publicly stated: "ROI is something I never ever consider. It is something I ignore. Maybe that’s why my ROI is off the charts" I'm happy for you -and your King- that return on investment is of no concern. Lucky you. For serious investors ROI is the paramount concern.

Regarding the pretzel-logic concept of land-locked domain names ... a lot of domainers like to draw a comparison between real estate (an asset you can own) and domain names (an asset you can't own). This analogy creates a false equivalency between these investments and can create unnecessary confusion in the marketplace. As I've previously stated, there are several widely-accepted methods for appraising real estate. There is no consensus valuation-model for domain names that can withstand peer-review scrutiny.

I'm here in good faith. I'm happy to have an honest, open and respectful discussion about these matters with people willing to reciprocate.

 

[topdom]

This false premise of .com supremacy creates an illusion of scarcity which in turn artificially drives up the price for .com domain names –on the secondary market– at the expense of all other TLDs.

Not at the expense of other tlds exactly. If there is no special tld, then almost no domain would be worth anything, except a few pefectly matching new tlds. But making a war against .biz was totally unnecessary. There are many 2 word german .biz domain sales in 5 figures. If such sales continued, then this would be good for .com as well. If Amazon was allowed to get business.biz then maybe .biz would replace .com just after dot-com bubble crash. (but then everyone would say it is unfair). Creating new domains was, I think an alternative to printing cash. Same for cryptos. You can't print cash, but you can take it from others by printing cryptos and tlds. This doesn't mean cryptos and new tlds don't have a future.

 

[jmcc]

wtf is a phone market?

imo...

Online only brandable? Basically, 2010-2014 was when a lot of the kited and Domain Tasting domain names were coming back into circulation after the domain drought caused by tasting and kiting. I think that Google had been playing with its algorithms and ad feeds around the same time.

Regards...jmcc

 

[equity78]

nope

some names just don't appeal to me... but do to others
I wouldn't bid on it or backorder it

imo….

Oh I would not pay $180,000, I would have taken it for $100. The sales data and usage shows that would be a profitable investment.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[jmcc]

Not just online John, there are businesses named Phone Market, one in Lousiville Here Address: 2201 W Broadway, Louisville, KY 40211

The franchise operations from the telcos have edged out a lot of the small businesses in the EU that were selling mobile phones prior to 2006, Raymond.
They either became branded shops for the telcos or they went out of business.
It would be a good name but tricky to defend as a service or trademark.

Regards...jmcc

 

[equity78]

The franchise operations from the telcos have edged out a lot of the small businesses in the EU that were selling mobile phones prior to 2006, Raymond.
They either became branded shops for the telcos or they went out of business.
It would be a good name but tricky to defend as a service or trademark.

Regards...jmcc

Yeah too generic for that, there are no trademarks for "Phone Market"

 

[equity78]

It also runs into a country problem. Mobile phones can be called "cellies", "mobiles", or "handies" depending on the country.

Regards...jmcc

Handies, always an interesting one.

 

[Furquan]

phonemarket .com is currently listed for sale for $5,888.

phonemarket .com sold for $180,000 in March 2012 (on Sedo)

The current sale price ($5,888) represents a 96.7% loss in value over seven years. A loss of this magnitude spooks serious investors and can damage the credibility of the domain name industry by highlighting volatility and irrationality. What happened? What caused this domain name to suffer such a dramatic loss in value?

Its was at $4350 at the lander some month ago.

 

[frank-germany]

The volatility and irrationality in this market is not restricted to one or a few transactions.

What happens when opportunity cost -associated with legacy top-level domains (e.g., .com, .net, .info, etc.)- is ignored?

Buyer pays $188,000 for Crystals.com.

Crystals.app is available for $220 per year.

It would take 854 years of .app registrations (@ current prices) to match the cost the buyer apparently paid for Crystals.com.

Another example of how status quo bias favors .com top-level domain. A prodigious percentage of people still believe #dotcom to be the only viable #TLD choice out of 1,200+ other options.

This false premise of .com supremacy creates an illusion of scarcity which in turn artificially drives up the price for .com domain names –on the secondary market– at the expense of all other TLDs.

No, I do not work for (or own) a ngTLD registry.

looks to me:
you have no clue

cristals.com
versus
cristals.app

are you kidding?

 

[Tewksbury]

looks to me:
you have no clue

cristals.com
versus
cristals.app

are you kidding?

Technically speaking, all TLDs are of equal utility. They all perform the exact same function. Not all TLDs are equal however in terms of safety, speed and brand-ability.

.app TLD is backed and managed by Google, the same company that dominates in mobile, search, geo/maps, web browser, online advertising, AI/ML, etc.

According to Google, .app is “the world’s first entirely secure all HTTPS open top-level domain.” "HTTPS is required to connect to all .app websites, helping protect against ad malware and tracking injection by ISPs, in addition to safeguarding against spying on open WiFi networks. Because .app will be the first TLD with enforced security made available for general registration, it’s helping move the web to an HTTPS-everywhere future in a big way.” (source)

People understand and use apps everyday.

Most native apps are no longer financially justifiable, having been disrupted by web services delivered via progressive web app ("PWA").

The .app TLD is included in the HSTS Preload of all major web browsers. Dotcom is not. This makes every .app domain name safer and faster compared to every other domain name not in the preload.

According to ntldstats.com .app is currently ranked 13th nTLD out of more than 1,200 gTLD delegated strings, with 445,885 registrations in the zone file record as of today. That's amazing growth considering -except for the initial launch in May 2018, there's been almost no publicity, advertising or marketing whatsoever.

.app TLD is just over a year old. As more people learn more about .app ... registrations and aftermarket values will likely increase significantly.

JMHO

 

[frank-germany]

Technically speaking, all TLDs are of equal utility. They all perform the exact same function. Not all TLDs are equal however in terms of safety, speed and brand-ability.

.app TLD is backed and managed by Google, the same company that dominates in mobile, search, geo/maps, web browser, online advertising, AI/ML, etc.

According to Google, .app is “the world’s first entirely secure all HTTPS open top-level domain.” "HTTPS is required to connect to all .app websites, helping protect against ad malware and tracking injection by ISPs, in addition to safeguarding against spying on open WiFi networks. Because .app will be the first TLD with enforced security made available for general registration, it’s helping move the web to an HTTPS-everywhere future in a big way.” (source)

People understand and use apps everyday.

Most native apps are no longer financially justifiable, having been disrupted by web services delivered via progressive web app ("PWA").

The .app TLD is included in the HSTS Preload of all major web browsers. Dotcom is not. This makes every .app domain name safer and faster compared to every other domain name not in the preload.

According to ntldstats.com .app is currently ranked 13th nTLD out of more than 1,200 gTLD delegated strings, with 445,885 registrations in the zone file record as of today. That's amazing growth considering -except for the initial launch in May 2018, there's been almost no publicity, advertising or marketing whatsoever.

.app TLD is just over a year old. As more people learn more about .app ... registrations and aftermarket values will likely increase significantly.

JMHO

as I said:
you miss it
you quote the salesman as proof?



but I see you are right
so I handreged cristals.eu just now

hey its a bargain at 14.888 Euro


at least its not suitable for an app only but for real-life goods in Europe
got the idea?

the .de is still available I didn't reg it

 

[Tewksbury]

as I said:
you miss it
you quote the salesman as proof?



but I see you are right
so I handreged cristals.eu just now

hey its a bargain at 14.888 Euro


at least its not suitable for an app only but for real-life goods in Europe
got the idea?

the .de is still available I didn't reg it

I see the status quo bias force is strong with you.