Undeveloped.com Experience

[JudgeMind]

Has anyone used undeveloped.com to sell domains? They claim to be able to increase a domainers sales by 54%.

 

[NameGroove]

Aren't we allowed to adjust

Hi All,

We've just launched a new class of for sale pages! See attached a screenshot or visit http://antiwet.com to check it out.

When you visit your individual domain settings page you can now add a logo. We'll automatically scale it to fit the business cards and change the domain for sale page into a "Brand For Sale Page".

This is the first iteration, so this product line will evolve. The first improvement will be made to the cards to make them feel more like business cards. So that's coming soon.

Please share your feedback with us about this first version. Your input will be greatly appreciated.

We'd advise everyone that sells brandable names to use tools like: tailorbrands.com to create a professional logo and upload it to your lander. The price perception of end-users increases when they get the feeling they're buying a brand. Most won't even use the logo but it does help. Also, try to use an as fancy as possible logo. We've seen pretty ugly logo's out there, I doubt if you settle for any logo design that it'll actually help you sell the domain you hold better.

You also pick 3 different background colors to match your domain + logo. Purple, Green and Blue.

Happy selling,
Reza

I don't see any difference. Where do I upload a logo? Where can I choose the new sales pages? And another note - where do I remove Paypal as an option?

 

[creataweb]

Tested the logo, works great.

 

[DAN.COM]

I don't see any difference. Where do I upload a logo? Where can I choose the new sales pages? And another note - where do I remove Paypal as an option?

Hi Sperry,

In your portfolio click on the domain you’d like to add a logo for. In the edit section you’ll see the option to add a logo which changes the for sale page to the new class.

Where would you like to remove Paypal as an option and why?

Take care,
Reza

 

[DAN.COM]

Happy holidays everyone! And all the best to you in the year to come! 2018 is going to be an exciting year!

 

[peace800]

Hi Reza

I seriously think you need to bring back the inquire or get in touch with seller option. Don't worry about time wasting offers. Uniregistry have a simple inquire button. Please do the same.


To simply have a make offer or buy now price button can put buyers off as they are forced to make an offer when they might want to just start a conversation going etc to start with.

 

[DomainGist]

@Undeveloped - I have just joined your site, very nice.

But a couple of things which would be nice:

1). Ability to sell .co.uk + .uk as a pair. This is common practice in the UK space at the minute, and will be until probably late 2019.

2). A degree of control over order of items (when unsorted) on portfolio page. If I could choose 2 or 3 strong domains to sit at the top that would be nice. That way the user can choose a couple of their strongest domains, which would encourage browsers to look further down the list. So basically 'featured' domains, but without the viewer knowing that they have been 'featured'.

 

[DAN.COM]

Hi Reza

I seriously think you need to bring back the inquire or get in touch with seller option. Don't worry about time wasting offers. Uniregistry have a simple inquire button. Please do the same.


To simply have a make offer or buy now price button can put buyers off as they are forced to make an offer when they might want to just start a conversation going etc to start with.

Hi,

I'm currently looking for the internal document with the statistics about the different options. Once I've found it I'll share it with you so you can see that that option hurts your income.

Kind regards,
Reza

 

[DAN.COM]

@Undeveloped - I have just joined your site, very nice.

But a couple of things which would be nice:

1). Ability to sell .co.uk + .uk as a pair. This is common practice in the UK space at the minute, and will be until probably late 2019.

2). A degree of control over order of items (when unsorted) on portfolio page. If I could choose 2 or 3 strong domains to sit at the top that would be nice. That way the user can choose a couple of their strongest domains, which would encourage browsers to look further down the list. So basically 'featured' domains, but without the viewer knowing that they have been 'featured'.

Welcome on board!

1: We currently do support facilitating transactions for both names when you've agreed to that with the buyer. Or do you mean showing both names on the landing page as well?

2: I understand, that could be interesting indeed. I've made a note of this feature request.

Kind regards,
Reza

 

[DAN.COM]

@anantj @alcy the simplified url structure is live guys. You can now use this format now: https://undeveloped.com/buy-domain/antiwet.com

The former url structure is forwarded to the new one. Users that use the old format don't have to worry about anything.

 

[anantj]

@anantj @alcy the simplified url structure is live guys. You can now use this format now: https://undeveloped.com/buy-domain/antiwet.com

The former url structure is forwarded to the new one. Users that use the old format don't have to worry about anything.

Thank you for the quick change. Appreciate it. Will go set it up now

 

[DAN.COM]

Hi Reza

I seriously think you need to bring back the inquire or get in touch with seller option. Don't worry about time wasting offers. Uniregistry have a simple inquire button. Please do the same.


To simply have a make offer or buy now price button can put buyers off as they are forced to make an offer when they might want to just start a conversation going etc to start with.

An upfront disclaimer: this is the first and last time we'll share this type of information to the public. In essence, we're now sharing information to competitors that they for some reason didn't collect or have. And that's not something we'd like to do more often.

You can review the statistics on buying action data over December 2015/January 2016 attached. So the results aren't based on our current for sale pages but 2 versions before the existing one.

As you can see, if you look at the full picture, price requests cannibalize down the funnel on your other options while the other options convert better in terms of paid and completed transactions. There's a reason why most marketplaces, including Sedo only work with Buy-nows and the Make Offer model. The inquire option yields more inquiries but down the funnel, converts very poorly.

Also in terms of average sale price the Buy Now option yield the highest sale price while the inquire option would return the lowest average sale price for sellers.

Our analysis of the above indicates that when there's already a price point from the seller, this leaves no room for the buyer to form a price point that's much lower than your expected price for a name. Also in terms of commitment, when a buyer places a legally binding offer it makes them already committed to a negotiation.

This is why we didn't continue offering that option since both you and Undeveloped in the end, generate less revenue when enabling that option.

The best converting setup currently is to enable: Buy Now + Make Offer + Installments.

And finally, when potential buyers have a question it's extremely simple for them to reach out to us. That's part of our service. We pick up these leads and answer any questions they have so they transact with you.

Hope that helps,

Reza

 

[DAN.COM]

Quick update regarding the new class of brand for sale pages. The second iteration is already live. After collecting first feedback from sellers and doing customer development with random buyers we've changed some elements here and there.

Here are some examples:

https://undeveloped.com/buy-domain/tanqa.com
http://antiwet.com
http://aptaco.com

 

[Mister Funsky]

An upfront disclaimer: this is the first and last time we'll share this type of information to the public

Thanks for sharing...I understand the need to keep internal data away from prying eyes!

A question regarding payments...would not having fully set up payment info fully negatively impact anyone attempting to buy a domain? I prefer to keep financial info to myself until a sale is pending.

Looking forward to a prosperous 2018...getting ready to list several hundred names with you to see what shakes out!

 

[DAN.COM]

Thanks for sharing...I understand the need to keep internal data away from prying eyes!

A question regarding payments...would not having fully set up payment info fully negatively impact anyone attempting to buy a domain? I prefer to keep financial info to myself until a sale is pending.

Looking forward to a prosperous 2018...getting ready to list several hundred names with you to see what shakes out!

Hi,

No it doesn’t impact your sales. You can also just add your paypal address for now to remove the warning about your missing billing details.

Take care,

Reza

 

[Mister Funsky]

Thanks for the fast response.

You can also just add your paypal address

I was with them (ppal) when they were 'x' back in the day...loved them for a couple of years even after they rebranded but they became too hard to deal with...too many fraudulent chargebacks that ate up time and profits. I only use their services when buying.

After the first of the year I will add bank account info...for me that is best/easiest method.

 

[anantj]

@Undeveloped It appears that Undeveloped's nameservers cannot be used with .is domains as they do not conform to the technical specs adhered to by ISNIC. This is the error message I get on ISNIC:

Test result # CHK-20171229.121617 for ns1.undeveloped.com:
The nameserver NS1.UNDEVELOPED.COM (52.209.184.250) seems to ignore test queries to UDP port 53
The nameserver NS1.UNDEVELOPED.COM (52.209.184.250) seems to reject connections to TCP port 53


The tech specs adherence that ISNIC expects:
https://isnic.is/en/host/req.php

Can you take a look at this? I can't redirect .is domains to Undeveloped at this time due to the aforementioned issue

 

[Michael M]

@Undeveloped It appears that Undeveloped's nameservers cannot be used with .is domains as they do not conform to the technical specs adhered to by ISNIC. This is the error message I get on ISNIC:

Test result # CHK-20171229.121617 for ns1.undeveloped.com:
The nameserver NS1.UNDEVELOPED.COM (52.209.184.250) seems to ignore test queries to UDP port 53
The nameserver NS1.UNDEVELOPED.COM (52.209.184.250) seems to reject connections to TCP port 53


The tech specs adherence that ISNIC expects:
https://isnic.is/en/host/req.php

Can you take a look at this? I can't redirect .is domains to Undeveloped at this time due to the aforementioned issue

@Undeveloped

It does appear as if your NS1 is down at this time.

Attempting to telnet in to test - the connection times out.
Connecting To ns1.undeveloped.com...Could not open connection to the host, on port 53: Connect failed

NS2 is responding correctly.

@anantj

Sometimes server (including nameserver) issues do occur. That is why most sites use two or more NS servers. That way your website will still work if one of those nameservers goes down.

None-the-less, Undeveloped should have their NS1 back up before too long and then you will be able to change your nameservers. This is a temporary issue.

FYI: If a nameserver does not respond to port 53 then it is not a matter of it not conforming to technical specs. Port 53 is what DNS servers use to communicate.

 

[DomainGist]

Welcome on board!

1: We currently do support facilitating transactions for both names when you've agreed to that with the buyer. Or do you mean showing both names on the landing page as well?

The UK domain space is a bit complicated at the moment (as you may well know?). A .co.uk domain registered before 2015 carries with it the rights to the .uk domain, and so many .uk domains are unregistered. In June 2019 (or somewhere around that time) those rights end, and the .co.uk owner has to register the .uk domain or it becomes available for public registration.

But there are of course .co.uk domains which 'drop' and at this point the .co.uk and .uk become seperated. So on DomainLore (wholesale / domainer marketplace) listings come in four forms, any of these:

a) .co.uk on its own
b) .uk on its own
c) .co.uk with .uk rights intact until 2019
d) .co.uk + .uk together

At the moment I have domains which fit category d. But for now I have just decided to list the .co.uk on undeveloped, and if I receive an offer it is a bridge we have to cross in negotiations perhaps. So if they offer $500 for the .co.uk and ask about the .uk, I can perhaps then offer the .uk together for $700 or something - so not a major issue for me personally. A solution to this for the next 18 months would help you gain traction with other UK domainers though I feel.

2: I understand, that could be interesting indeed. I've made a note of this feature request.

Kind regards,
Reza

It would make a lot of sense. It would be frustrating for people to have a portfolio of $200 domains together with some $5000 domains.... and for the first 2 or 3 listings to be the rubbish ones. Just being able to control the first 2 or 3 results when unsorted would be good for the buyers perception of the wider portfolio.... plus most domainers have a good idea which of their domains are the most valuable, so taking that small section out of the hands of the algorithms would make sense to me? Visitors do not have to know that these first couple of results are manually selected by the seller.

 

[anantj]

@Undeveloped

It does appear as if your NS1 is down at this time.

Attempting to telnet in to test - the connection times out.
Connecting To ns1.undeveloped.com...Could not open connection to the host, on port 53: Connect failed

NS2 is responding correctly.

@anantj

Sometimes server (including nameserver) issues do occur. That is why most sites use two or more NS servers. That way your website will still work if one of those nameservers goes down.

None-the-less, Undeveloped should have their NS1 back up before too long and then you will be able to change your nameservers. This is a temporary issue.

FYI: If a nameserver does not respond to port 53 then it is not a matter of it not conforming to technical specs. Port 53 is what DNS servers use to communicate.

Thanks. It is possible that the downtime of ns1 is the problem. When I tested ns2 with ISNIC's conformance testing, it passes fine.

 

[DAN.COM]

Thanks. It is possible that the downtime of ns1 is the problem. When I tested ns2 with ISNIC's conformance testing, it passes fine.

Hi Anant, try again now snd please let me know if it worked. The server of ns1 was replaced today.