debate What is the difference between a good domain name and a bad name?

[xynames]

I'm not referring to the stellar, obviously good ones, like x.com sex.com beer.com aaaa.com etc. that may be considered money in the bank, that people will fight over to buy at any given moment. The stellar ones might be different things at different times, for example btc.com ethereum.com today, versus years ago. But I'm not talking about these types of instant cash domains.


I just mean "good" versus "bad."

I think that a good domain, if held on to long enough, will sell for a decent price, when the right buyer who needs it comes along,

while a bad domain, no matter how long held, will rarely sell for much of anything. (Unless it is lucky enough to come into fashion as some new trend, such as for example, a new cryptocurrency etc.)

That's the key difference. That time, and the right buyer, equal a cha-ching! of a good sale.

By implication, even a good domain doesn't necessarily translate to instant money in the bank. It takes the time and patience to wait for the right buyer.

But your crappy names, no matter how long you wait, the chances of someone wanting them enough to pay much of anything for them, are slim.


See also:
Which kind of domainer are you?
https://www.namepros.com/threads/which-kind-of-domainer-are-you.1053017/

 

[namelancer]

Answer:... the eyes of the beholder

 

[xynames]

Disagree. And the proof is how many domainers are currently dumping their multi thousand portfolios.

If you have a couple thousand names and can't bring in at least in the neighborhood of $75,000. net per year, then your eyes need a new set of glasses.

 

[namelancer]

Mistakes committed by investors in domaining strategy (due to holding out for higher resale value that never came or on account of market saturation) should not be confused with building a portfolio as such just as the messenger shouldn't be mistaken for the contents of the message.

Disagree. And the proof is how many domainers are currently dumping their multi thousand portfolios.

1. Correlation is not causation.
2. It's highly unlikely for holders of large domain portfolios to warehouse bad or defected inventory.

 

[namelancer]

Disagree. And the proof is how many domainers are currently dumping their multi thousand portfolios.

It' a matter of economics (sense) more often than not, seen, for example in distributorship business that is primarily is built on a family-unit model, scaling of which is prohibitive due to costs of employee acquisitions in the end eating all the profits.

 

[MapleDots]

I think a good domain name nowadays is something that can be trademarked and is a bit different from the norm. Catchy made up words are coming into fashion now that most common words are in use.

I read an article a while back which said entire companies are named on the availability of a domain name. I remember an insurance company called clarica was formed when two companies merged. They made up the word based on the fact that the .com was available. This company has been absorbed again but is just an example.

A classic example is a new bank that was formed in Canada called simplii financial. They could have used simply but they probably figured the trademark was easier for simplii.

I predict we will see a lot more of this type of domain come to the foreground, in fact I am betting on it.

 

[xynames]

It' a matter of economics (sense) more often than not, seen, for example in distributorship business that is primarily is built on a family-unit model, scaling of which is prohibitive due to costs of employee acquisitions in the end eating all the profits.

You type a lot without saying anything.

They are dumping because their names are not selling. Not profitable.

 

[namelancer]

They are dumping because their names are not selling. Not profitable.

Your current answer is incomplete, because you argued that the reason for inability to sell was the low quality of inventory:

while a bad domain, no matter how long held, will rarely sell for much of anything.

My preceding response tried to identify at least one of the reasons for the slow-down in profits as being the large inventory (high number of domains) and what could be a random nature of a buyer finding a domain of interest.

 

[xynames]

Exactly. Bad names. Bad inventory. Must dump. Must sterilize!

 

[namelancer]

Exactly. Bad names. Bad inventory. Must dump.

Not exactly. Could also be good enough, decent names. But too large inventory. A buyer or name being in the wrong place at the wrong time with respect to each other.

 

[xynames]

Only the good will survive. The bad will cease to exist in the world of domaining.

 

[namelancer]

Now you are making transition from good/bad domains to good/bad domainers.

 

[xynames]

No, if you have bad domains you won't be able to sell no matter how long you wait, and will have to dump.

 

[namelancer]

The reason people are selling their portfolios is not necessarily limited to or is a reflection of the quality of domains held by them.

 

[Dave]

A good name is one that has memorability, easy to spell and has or highly likely to have more than one end user available to buy the domain name.

A bad domain name is one that has no memorability, fails the radio test or spelling test and has no clear end user now or in the foreseeable future and/or has no commercial viability.

There are also what I call middle of the road domain names. Ones that look good, read well and are memorable but have only one or no available end user anywhere in the world but there is a high chance they will some day. Think trending technologies or appealing brandables.Things we take an educated guess on that will have a buyer someday but none exist yet. (Take ElectricCars.com, Bitcoin.com as examples. Once upon a time these domains were almost worthless but someone had the foresight to register).

 

[xynames]

The reason people are selling their portfolios is not necessarily limited to or is a reflection of the quality of domains held by them.

Have you looked at the lists of domains posted by people here who are offering up their entire inventories? Why, it should be clear to a child why such names aren’t selling.

 

[namelancer]

Have you looked at the lists of domains posted by people here who are offering up their entire inventories? Why, it should be clear to a child why such names aren’t selling.

No, because to keep the hand on the market pulse I need to look here, there and everywhere.
Besides, there are numerous great, pronounceable 4L.coms posted on this forum for sale that would be the envy of a serious domain investor.

 

[xynames]

Well if you haven’t even looked at the complete portfolios being offered for sale here, by those seeking to dump everything, then why are you yammering on and on about something you haven’t looked at yet. How can you comment ? Why do you comment?

Let’s just change your NP name to “Irrelevent Chit Chat Artist.” What do a smattering of four letter names being offered, that you suddenly mention out of the blue, have to do with your commenting on the quality of portfolios you haven’t even looked at?

 

[namelancer]

There was no reference to the complete portfolios being offered for sale here in the main text of your initial statement.

 

[xynames]

Okay okay I’m just being lighthearted but still you should look at the portfolios in question then comment on general reasons for why you think they might be selling.

 

[namelancer]

There are more portfolios out there to be looked at than merely the portfolios sold on the forum.

 

[Ategy]

There are times when I simply do not understand end users who buy/use domains as a whole. Seriously .. just take a look at the expiring auctions. Most of the names are just flat out unusable .. horrible beyond comprehension ... and yet some of these names were bought and renewed for a decade or more!

Worse yet .. some even get sold again at expired auctions.

Anyhow .. while I completely agree with your general statement .. I don't really see the point of this debate .. you've framed it way too abstractly ... as I'd think a large number of domainers wouldn't even agree on the same set of parameters needed for both the green and red parts of your statement:

.. will sell for a decent price, when the right buyer who needs it comes along,
while a bad domain, no matter how long held, will rarely sell for much of anything.

The whole entire point of investing in domains (or anything else) is to sell domains at a profit .. obviously everyone who wants to be a domainer buys domains they think will sell. So theoretically every single domain ever purchased by a domainer is a "good domain" by your very subjective definition .. lol

When you ask a question like "What is the difference between a good domain name and a bad name?" .. the helpful answers people are looking for is more actual domain characteristics .. like length .. radio test .. singular/plural .. age .. cpc .. whatever .. etc etc ...

Obviously each of those characteristics might or might not make the domain good (or bad) .. as you could easily have domains that are technically good .. but in reality are just bad for one of a very large number of possible reasons.

The real actual tangible answer is very long and complicated .. it involves a lot of science, a lot of art, a lot of outside knowledge and sometimes even dumb luck (particularly for domains you can get cheap because a couple of people slept in or couldn't participate in the expiring auctions that day .. because purchase price is 100% aligned with quality of name when judging if your domain was a good buy or not) .. and while not part of the a particular domain quality assessment .. if you're evaluating the success of an overall portfolio then add in work/time (going through lists .. making sure all your domains are listed everywhere .. etc etc).

 

[Fancy.domains]

I consider good domain to be:

A) A .com / .org / .net or a popular ccTLD (such as .de / .co.uk / .io / .co / .se / .in etc), with keyword(s) taken in almost all ”worse” extensions. Example: Golfclub (dot) com.

B) A new gTLD in which the keyword and extension forms a phrase which is taken in most other extensions. Example: Golf (dot) club. Here, renewal fees etc are also a main factor!

C) A good hack. Example: Cl (dot) ub. Also here, renewal fees etc might be an important factor!

 

[HotKey]

Recognition, popularity and ease of use. In that order.

 

[Amzymayor]

Names that sell are good domains while domains still pending sales are bad domains. Simple and case closed!