When to start calling someone a domainer

[wo]

There are many people who own many domains. What criteria do you use when deciding if someone is seriously a domainer or just a newbie wanna-be?

When they own X domains? What is X to you? and what if they own 1000s of domains but they're all worthless.

or when they've sold X domains? What is X to you? and what if someone never sold any domains but they own a few very high premium domains.

or when they've sold total domains worth of X?

or a combination of all these?

or something else.

So if you consider yourself a domainer, and someone says they're a domainer too, how do you decide who's really a newbie and who's really a domainer.

 

[dompro]

If you have read blog posts around the internet, they define a domainer as someone who takes domain names hostage. Then asks for ransom money from people who actually need to use those domains (a.k.a. end-users) to build websites that will benefit the internet community.

Domainers do not add anything of value to the domains they own to justify the astronomical increase in their reselling price, other than the fact that they got those domains first, and would gladly put them into auction to the highest bidder.

may be slightly off topic of OP question, but I just have to reply to this:

Domainers are people (like stock traders) who create market in domain names. If person or company wants the best domain for their new project or site and have $xxx,xxx in the budget, even almost 30 years since the .com registrations started, they still can get a dream name from a domainer who will be always interested to sell. That would not be the case if all good names were already developed because any joe can get them for reg fee!

 

[Kate]

Q: When to start calling someone a domainer
A: You don't, they are called squatters right. Domainer is a title you bestow upon your peers - lol

 

[infmoney]

NOBODY builds a website to help the community. They develop to bring visitors, which they sell advertising and make money from, if not sell a product or service.

It's called capitalism.. People see an opportunity and make something of it. It's no different than stocks or real estate. Why is an "enduser" more entitled to a domain than the person who found it first and bought it?(not talking about tm squatters).

It's not like domainers aren't paying or taking risks on what they purchase.

If you have read blog posts around the internet, they define a domainer as someone who takes domain names hostage. Then asks for ransom money from people who actually need to use those domains (a.k.a. end-users) to build websites that will benefit the internet community.

Domainers do not add anything of value to the domains they own to justify the astronomical increase in their reselling price, other than the fact that they got those domains first, and would gladly put them into auction to the highest bidder.

 

[Archangel]

This is a generalization, I assume. The last site I developed was for a church. The site is 100% ad-less & I refused payment for it.

NOBODY builds a website to help the community.

 

[infmoney]

This is a generalization, I assume. The last site I developed was for a church. The site is 100% ad-less & I refused payment for it.

That's fine, then I will change it to 99% of people develop websites to MAKE money.

Those that say "domainers" are squatters are those that want to pay reg fee for sex.com, realestate.com, business.com ,etc.

If they had the chance, they'd probably build a mediocre website and most would feel they don't deserve it either.

 

[alien51]

The above is the basic argument of those who believe domainers are evil--that we shouldn't own what we aren't using & prefer to sell it to someone who does.

Exactly. A lot of people hate domainers. And truthfully, it's understandble.

Q: When to start calling someone a domainer
A: You don't, they are called squatters right. Domainer is a title you bestow upon your peers - lol

I saw this coming. lol

The last site I developed was for a church. The site is 100% ad-less & I refused payment for it.

Which is supposed to be what .ORG is all about. :D

That's fine, then I will change it to 99% of people develop websites to MAKE money.

Publishing content in the internet, is not all about making money.

 

[pick.pk]

There are many people who own many domains. What criteria do you use when deciding if someone is seriously a domainer or just a newbie wanna-be?

When they own X domains? What is X to you? and what if they own 1000s of domains but they're all worthless.

or when they've sold X domains? What is X to you? and what if someone never sold any domains but they own a few very high premium domains.

or when they've sold total domains worth of X?

or a combination of all these?

or something else.

So if you consider yourself a domainer, and someone says they're a domainer too, how do you decide who's really a newbie and who's really a domainer.

none of the above imo..

When they know what they are doing and why they are doing it...

 

[Archangel]

Domains are "internet real estate." If I own a mansion someone wants but can't afford, then they shouldn't bitch about not having the money & about how I'm holding it "hostage" to a high payer. Same with domains. A king's ransom or not: if I owned cars.com & wanted $5mil for it, IT IS GOSPEL. I (theoretically) own it & could do whatever I want with it. If ya don't like the price, then boo hoo. There is 0% difference in selling a domain to a car or a house (minus the whole 'physical' thing). But ppl fear what they don't know & that ignorance of THEIRS hurts US.

That's fine, then I will change it to 99% of people develop websites to MAKE money.

Those that say "domainers" are squatters are those that want to pay reg fee for sex.com, realestate.com, business.com ,etc.

If they had the chance, they'd probably build a mediocre website and most would feel they don't deserve it either.

 

[alien51]

If I own a mansion someone wants but can't afford, then they shouldn't bitch about not having the money & about how I'm holding it "hostage" to a high payer. Same with domains. A king's ransom or not: if I owned cars.com & wanted $5mil for it, IT IS GOSPEL. I (theoretically) own it & could do whatever I want with it. If ya don't like the price, then boo hoo.

Hostage-for-Ransom, is a business model. And it comes in various forms. It can be domaining, hoarding of goods, ticket scalping, or seizing shipping vessels off Somalian waters; but the business concept is the same.

But whether it is ethical, or a natural form of capitalism, is what makes people angry. Because they believe it is not a legitimate form of commerce (paying for goods that have added value), but a form of pure exploitation.

 

[liquidcherry]

Hostage-for-Ransom, is a business model. And it comes in various forms. It can be domaining, hoarding of goods, ticket scalping, or seizing shipping vessels off Somalian waters; but the business concept is the same.

WOW, i beg to differ...

You just compared domainers to somalian pirates..so, in your terms domainers capature a vessel(the enduser) with force,guns maybe fatalities (they don't care) and hold them prisoner until someone pays the ransom....??(or attacks,kills them)

just rethink (or rephrase lol)i would say

cheers

liquid

 

[alien51]

WOW, i beg to differ...

You just compared domainers to somalian pirates..so, in your terms domainers capature a vessel(the enduser) with force,guns maybe fatalities (they don't care) and hold them prisoner until someone pays the ransom....??(or attacks,kills them)

What i said was: The business model is the same.

Now the manner of executing such business model, may be different. If you kill people or break any laws, then your method is criminal.

But if you are not breaking any laws, but your practice is "questionable", then you are subject to various "ethical/moral" interpretations.

Nevertheless, your basic business model is the same: To take something you don't really need. Then ask for payment from somebody who actually cares about the merchandise you are holding without adding value to the merchandise.

 

[liquidcherry]

What i said was: The business model is the same.

Now the manner of executing such business model, may be different. If you kill people or break any laws, then your method is criminal.

But if you are not breaking any laws, but your practice is "questionable", then you are subject to various "ethical/moral" interpretations.

Nevertheless, your basic business model is the same: To take something you don't really need. Then ask for payment from somebody who actually cares about the merchandise you are holding.

you just rephrased :wave::great::P

cheers

liquid

 

[alien51]

you just rephrased :wave::great::P

cheers

liquid

If you sugar-coat something, it may not taste that bad after all. :p That's called MARKETING.

 

[liquidcherry]

if you sugar-coat something, it may not taste that bad after all. :p that's called marketing.

mark a thing!!

 

[cache]

Although domains are not as liquid as other commodities, the concept is same as any other "buy low" and "sell high" business model:
1. stock traders, buy low and sell high, how do they add value to the society? simply a lubricant.
2. people buy at garage sale and flip at ebay.
3. whole sale trading companies.
4. art or coin collector.
5. airfare consolidators
6. commodity/future trading

 

[alien51]

1. stock traders, buy low and sell high, how do they add value to the society? simply a lubricant.
6. commodity/future trading

These two (2) items, cannot be used as an apple-to-apple comparison with internet domains. Because stock shares of a company, are not "usable" merchandise. Unlike an internet domain, is meant to be used as a website.

When ICANN launched new TLDs, they were not meant in principle to open new grounds for people to trade domain names. These new TLDs were launched so that internet website developers can have more options to choose for their online presence.

They didn't say, okay we will launch the .GREEN tld so domainers can earn profits reselling them to end-users.

 

[zoomactive.com]

I would consider someone in Domaining when they have a large portfolio of domains that are either for sale or are being developed to be sold. Many people have 20 domains however those who have hundreds are really a domainer. You don't have to do domaining full time to be a domainer. Domaining is simply an investment.

 

[.NJ]

1. stock traders, buy low and sell high, how do they add value to the society? simply a lubricant.

I actually agree with this comparison.

But I think adding the word "Penny" in front of stock traders is a more accurate term for the domain industry.

 

[JFS]

sorry but for me to be a domainer you don't need hundreads or thousands of domains...you can buy and sell one domain at a time with profit, doesn't that make him/her a domainer aswell ?