Perhaps the following policy should be adopted,

"If the name has more than 5 links it isn't really a domain sale, we'll call it the sale of an item formerly known as a domain"

A domain sale is a domain sale whether it was valuable because it was a popular search terms, a typo or had old links. For dnjournal to be guessing as to why every name sold (which is basically what bid is asking) would be a minefield.

Originally posted by snoopy
Perhaps the following policy should be adopted,

"If the name has more than 5 links it isn't really a domain sale, we'll call it the sale of an item formerly known as a domain"

A domain sale is a domain sale whether it was valuable because it was a popular search terms, a typo or had old links. For dnjournal to be guessing as to why every name sold (which is basically what bid is asking) would be a minefield.

Guessing ? Minefield ?

All you that had to guesswhether weddinglinksobline.com was a domain sale or a developed traffic sale raise your hand ..

excuses dont cut it..

The idea that Ron cant look at every domain..dosent cut it either .. he can certainly hire someone to to do that vetting.. and or let the vetting occur on the forums like it is now..

we all know that the domain had no value in that sale

Thats all I am saying... thhat these clear cut developed traffic sales names should either have an asterick..their own section and or not included.. that would be the right thing to do .. IMO

There is no justification for misleading people into thinking that was a domain sale

Originally posted by bidawinner
Does Caveat Emptor apply to all those in the general public that see these so called domain sales and purchase something similar..your onlineweddinglinks.com for example ?

Well I dont actually know but I would be very surprised if Caveat Emptor did not apply, however as always I stand ready to be corrected

Because then you could just go "boo-hoo Safesys said such-and-such.com was worth $x,xxx in the appraisals of DS or DNJ said this-and-that.net sold for $x,xxx - therefore I am going to phone my lawyer"

However I appreciate your sentiment of trying to protect people from making bad domain decisions.

Personally my opinion is that it might be helpful if DS were to let themselves be spidered on google etc. so that people could have more info on matters like these and the very point you raise would have a chance of being by more people.

Originally posted by bidawinner

we all know that the domain had no value in that sale

Load of rubbish, the domain is what was sold.

If anything else came with the domain, ie like content files etc then it is not simply a domain sale but to suggest it is not a domain sale simply because the domain has links in makes no sense. The links in are a characteristic of the domain.

Originally posted by bidawinner

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

whois hasnt changed yet,

will the present site be part of the transfer ,does anyone know??

just a guess but where the owner hasnt taken down the site
for the transfer chances are they sold the site with the wedding listings..in sedo's section for website sales ,,,sedo could easliy clarify this...

Originally posted by snoopy
Load of rubbish, the domain is what was sold.

If anything else came with the domain, ie like content files etc then it is not simply a domain sale but to suggest it is not a domain sale simply because the domain has links in makes no sense. The links in are a characteristic of the domain.

Total nonsense .. the VALUE of that name is the developed traffic period.. it's foolish trying to suggest anything other than the bare bone facts

why is the truth of the matter so terrible to face ?

Originally posted by bidawinner
the VALUE of that name is the developed traffic period..

There, you have said it "the value of the name", links are simply a characteristic of the domain that may give it value. He is reporting the price of "the name", and not simply the price of links. That is point of a sales report, to convey selling prices of domains. Duke isn't likely to start reading minds as to why someone would have paid a certain price, he is simply reporting the name and price it sold for, something that is very clear cut.

Originally posted by snoopy
There, you have said it "the value of the name", links are simply a characteristic of the domain that may give it value. He is reporting the price of "the name", and not simply the price of links. That is point of a sales report, to convey selling prices of domains. Duke isn't likely to start reading minds as to why someone would have paid a certain price, he is simply reporting the name and price it sold for, something that is very objective.

Snoopy this isnt that difficult and certainly dosent take a mind reader or psychic to simply point out that the majority of value is from developed traffic on THAT domain and others like it .. (hence an asterick .. who in here has any doubt which names are sold on intrinsic DOMIN value and which are sold on developed traffic? )

The asterick..the sperate category would simply be ...

SO people (new domainers and the general public) dont get mislead into thinking names like weddinglinksonline.com are worth $34,000 ..

The "message" that is being sent out now DOES imply that names like that are worth tens of thousands.. when we ALL no better ..

just a few years ago you and many others were making the exact same aurgument I am now.. names like weddinglinksonline.com have very little INTRINSIC value .. certainly not $34,000

The domains sales should be given with context.. thats not so difficult is it ?

There ARE plenty of sales that do fiot the intrinsic natural value ..DOMAIN VALUE-- Those names should be at the top of the list .. ..seperated from developed traffic sales IMO

Originally posted by bidawinner
Snoopy this isnt that difficult and certainly dosent take a mind reader or psychic to simply point out that the majority of value is from developed traffic on THAT domain and others like it .. (hence an asterick .. who in here has any doubt which names are sold on intrinsic DOMIN value and which are sold on developed traffic? )

I'd like to see you write a policy on how dnjournal should treat these names ie something that would determine what the buyer was thinking when they bought the name based on links, popularity of terms etc. Perhaps you could also write some sort of script for dnjournal to use so they can scan through the hundreds of sales each week to separate out and asterix these names.

Perhaps dnjournal should also separate out the names that were likely sold based on being a typo or have traffic due to possible confusion with another site, eg based on your views would a sale like porker.com be misleading as well?, how about the people who see that name and think any domain to do with pigs must be worth a lot?

Originally posted by bidawinner
There is no justification for misleading people into thinking that was a domain sale

By this thinking, every real estate sale reported would have to provide the reason for the sales price. Otherwise, how else would the inexperienced home buyer avoid confusion in trying to understand why a 2500 square-foot two-story house in Boston's Beacon Hill area costs four times as much as the exact same house in Cheyenne Wyoming?

Or newspapers will have to start providing detailed and accurate analyses for every single stock price movement on their stock market listings pages. Price increases based on earnings would have to be clearly designated as such, in order to avoid confusion with more speculative price drivers. Otherwise some investment newbie might buy a rising stock without realizing he's buying in at the top.

Bid...I respect you and your opinions...but man 'o man you are really out in left field on this one. Asking Ron to distinguish between domain sales based on links/previous-development and sales for "natural" type-in traffic (and then perhaps even sales for low-traffic, high-appeal "vanity" names) is completely unreasonable.

Ron's DNJournal publishes domain name sales. If a name sells (without a website or attached business), and if the price is made public, he reports the price. End of story. If anyone seeks to be able to understand why a certain domain sells for a certain price, then they need to put in their time to learn this business, just like the rest of us did. The same goes for pretty much any market-based business, whether it's real estate, diamonds or domains.

Constructive criticism is never a bad thing. I even think Ron being the good businessman he is doesn't mind the question brought up here:

Should sale listings be somehow arranged to show 1) domains sold w/traffic 2) domains sold without

Truly we'd all agree the value of the information would be more beneficial than just listing them out from high to low.

DNJ was one of the first publications to have a weekly sales listing so in 2004 this was a good thing.

In 2007 is just the "listing" of the domains going to cut it?

Constructively, I would say no, however Ron who does a good bit of this without being truly compensated would probably say, that's the best it's going to get.

My thoughts are that it's not such a significant issue right now, but as this market matures, it could effect DNJ as their could be upstarts creating "snazzy" sales listings whereby all you do is put your pointer over the listing and it would give the history of the domain... and get this: A Google AD to look it (ahh.... sometimes oppportunity is where you least expect it!)

Originally posted by namethink
Bid...I respect you and your opinions...but man 'o man you are really out in left field on this one. Asking Ron to distinguish between domain sales based on links/previous-development and sales for "natural" type-in traffic (and then perhaps even sales for low-traffic, high-appeal "vanity" names) is completely unreasonable.

Yeah Might also have to toss in a requirement that the buyer state exactly how they intend to use the domain after it's sold.

Bid, you won the argument that this domain's value was mostly fro content / dev ... We could also argue that car.com's value is from the same thing, specifically the *BILLIONS* (100's of!) of dollars spent to develope and promote the internet back in 2000 - But why go there?

But why go there?

because website developers want to get a foothold in the coverage that these domain sales are getting to try and help shore up their prices which are generally on far weaker multiples than domain sales.

Originally posted by safesys
because website developers want to get a foothold in the coverage that these domain sales are getting to try and help shore up their prices which are generally on far weaker multiples than domain sales.

No we want Domainers to quit BS about domains being sold.. when in fact developed traffic sold..

This isnt even a arguement.. the domain weddinglinksonline.com is worth about $60 .


The TRAFFIC generated on that site is where nearly All the value is ..
ALL domainers understand that ... but the general public dosent have aclue..

I wonder how many names like this are sold to "end user" companies an the seller claims direct navigation traffic ?


I find it amusing that you wnat to debate value between developed and domain ..when all the value in this name IS developed !