The new weekly domain sales report is out at DNJournal.com. The market remains solid as a rock with this week's top sale, Gibraltar.com, a perfect example of that as one of the 16 sweetest sales reported so far this year. The market has been so strong we have decided to permanently double the size of our all-extension Top 20 list to 40 positions. .Com took 34 of those spots this week with three going to .net, 1 to .org and 1 each to German and American ccTLD domains. The .nets ruled the Global Contenders chart, taking the top three spots, while Germany's .de dominated the country codes with 11 chart entries, followed by America's .us with five. You can read all about it here: http://www.dnjournal.com/domainsales.htm

Looks good overall but I still have issues with names like weddinglinksonline.com for $34,000..

The idea that weddinglinksonline.com the domain sold for $34,000 is deceptive.. and gives the wrong imprssion to may people getting in the domain business

Once again .. the domain weddinglinksonline.com is insignificant....the VALUE is in the previous development

http://web.archive.org/web/200703080...nksonline.com/

These types of names should have astericks by them IMO ..

truth be told ..they should read ..

Developed Traffic Names that Sold for $$$$$$$

The idea that Ron would have to go through every name and determine why they sold and itemise them seems a bit silly.

I'd trust they anyone who has spent more than 5 minutes researching this industry will realise that domains sell for a number of reasons and traffic from previous development is just one of those potential reasons.

Ron is reporting domain names that sold, if all someone buys is the domain name then that is a domain name sale regardless of the underlying reasoning for buying just a domain name.

Originally posted by safesys
The idea that Ron would have to go through every name and determine why they sold and itemise them seems a bit silly.

The names are not properly vetted .. it is not "Silly" to show which DOMAINS sold for reasons OTHER than being a domain


Look we have major media spreading these "domain" sales to millions of people based on these "reports" ... If the report were completed and fully vetted then it would bring a little more reality to the millions that read, see these "domain" sales in the major media

It's extremely hypocrital to act as if some of these are domain sales.. as domain alone which this industry likes to constantly hype..

I'd be more than happy to start helping MSNBC , Forbes etc..understand the "reality" of some of the "domain" sales if that is what it takes

The buyer didnt give a ratts ass what the "domain" was ..he wasnt buying a domain.. he was buying traffic

thats the bottom line

The names are not properly vetted .. it is not "Silly" to show which DOMAINS sold for reasons OTHER than being a domain

They are domains being sold and domains being bought - that there are a multitude of reasons why domains are bought is a given.

It's extremely hypocrital to act as if some of these are domain sales.. as domain alone which this industry likes to constantly hype..

As above, they are domain sales - all that has occurred is the value of the domain has been affected by external factors like previous development.

The practicalities of going through every reported domain sale to determine the reason why the domain had that value - which is going to be based on assumption in many cases - is totally unrealistic imo.

The buyer didnt give a ratts ass what the "domain" was ..he wasnt buying a domain.. he was buying traffic

The item that cash was exchanged for and the item that was delivered was just the domain name. Just because the value in the domain was based on some other factor doesn't deviate from that simple fact.

Yawn

whatever .. denial is a wonderful thing ..just keep saying they were domain sales over and over and over ..reinforce whatever reality you want.

weddinglinksoline.com

value $60

Weddinglinksonline.com developed traffic value $34,000


Another nice developed traffic name sold ..

Originally posted by Domo Sapiens
Yawn

go back to your cave ..paint on the wall or something

whatever .. denial is a wonderful thing ..just keep saying they were domain sales over and over and over ..reinforce whatever reality you want.

There's no denial here - I'm not disagreeing that the domain value was increased as a result of any previous development.

The comparison to commercial premises sales still stands.

A commercial premises can have its value increased hugely by the previous tenant but if it is sold as an empty building then it is just a commercial premises sale - not the sale of a business.

Originally posted by safesys
There's no denial here - I'm not disagreeing that the domain value was increased as a result of any previous development.

The comparison to commercial premises sales still stands.

A commercial premises can have its value increased hugely by the previous tenant but if it is sold as an empty building then it is just a commercial premises sale - not the sale of a business.

I know what you are saying paul but I disagree with your analogy..


The location "address" of the the brick and mortar commercial property will remain on that busy street full of traffic ..forever



this domain weddinglinksonline.com (address) has little natural traffic passing by it .. other than the traffic developed for it .. it is not sitting on Main street recieving those traffic benefits ..it is sitting 4 blocks off of Main street and traffic was routed to it via search , links etc..

This domain was sold not on it's address ..not on it's building but on it's ability to detour traffic to it


I see it.. not a commercial property sale but as a traffic management sale

The argument of -
The sale price of a domain with or without development comes
up approximately once a month.

It just keeps coming around.

Isn't this what is called a circular argument?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

If I was the panelist in this arbitration discussion, I would
side with the commercial property argument.

The location "address" of the the brick and mortar commercial property will remain on that busy street full of traffic ..forever

In your scenario you're saying the traffic is there regardless - that doesn't map to this domain. To be comparable, we'd be looking at property off the beaten track that nobody would have visited before, but the previous occupants created the visitors to that specific building.

If they then vacate but it still has residual footfall it is still just a commercial premises sale - it has simply increased in value.

Originally posted by actnow
If I was the panelist in this arbitration discussion, I would
side with the commercial property argument.

Based on a review of WIPO/UDRP panelist decisions it would appear the panelist decisions are frequently wrong ..

Originally posted by bidawinner
Based on a review of WIPO/UDRP panelist decisions it would appear the panelist decisions are frequently wrong ..

Touche.