Free.co.uk SOLD $205,000 by DomainBooth.com

[Hay]

Am i wrong in thinking that if you push brand awareness on the term "Free" you could potentially be up against "Three".. whilst i know both operate different sectors, i still think "Three" is what people would assume when hearing the term "Free" on the radio.

 

[philliph]

Thumps up for this. icelolly.uk is on domainlore right now and IceLolly.com and .co.uk are held by the holiday firm IceLolly Marketing Ltd. It's mental how people are letting a shorter version of their name go.

I thought that after I caught it

 

[Aaron Clifford]

Am i wrong in thinking that if you push brand awareness on the term "Free" you could potentially be up against "Three".. whilst i know both operate different sectors, i still think "Three" is what people would assume when hearing the term "Free" on the radio.

I think that's a fair thinking pattern.

 

[twostepsbehind]

A better website and decent marketing campaign will get this off the ground

"Sell your home for free - free.co.uk" - this would be enough

There's another online estate agent on Strike (strike.co.uk) that has a really really good website, but of course the name is appalling

Maybe they should merge

 

[Lucky Luke]

I'm seeing an increasing number of lorries on the road using .uk rather than .co.uk. Clearly, there are more .co.uk's in total, but the .uk is getting traction.

 

[888]

website looks awful in my opinion. spend that much on a domain and so little on web design bonkers.

 

[4ndy]

On the subject of .co.uk and .uk I am selling lots of .uk to USA/Overseas buyers and they don't want the .co.uk version from me?

Also .uk domains rank just as easy in google uk as the .co.uk version.

If I was starting a new brand and had both I would run with the .uk version especially if advertising offline as less chance of leakage to .com version, if someone sees my advert or poster, banner etc for mywebsite.uk as opposed to mywebsite.co.uk. then .uk is easier to remember and no reference to .co, where as .co.uk could end up as .com especially if my browser auto adds, inserts or suggests it.

 

[ratboy]

On the subject of .co.uk and .uk I am selling lots of .uk to USA/Overseas buyers and they don't want the .co.uk version from me?

Also .uk domains rank just as easy in google uk as the .co.uk version.

If I was starting a new brand and had both I would run with the .uk version especially if advertising offline as less chance of leakage to .com version, if someone sees my advert or poster, banner etc for mywebsite.uk as opposed to mywebsite.co.uk. then .uk is easier to remember and no reference to .co, where as .co.uk could end up as .com especially if my browser auto adds, inserts or suggests it.

Interesting Andy
Do you think Brexit will push the UK brand into a stronger place? or already is?

 

[4ndy]

Interesting Andy
Do you think Brexit will push the UK brand into a stronger place? or already is?

Iam unsure of the brexit effect probably no change.

 

[JMI]

Pretty obvious brexit will strengthen "UK" international brand.

It's more of an issue if Jimmy Krankie tries for a split.. or god forbid Kim Joug-Drakeford has ideas too..

 

[dee]

It's more of an issue if Jimmy Krankie tries for a split.

lol....fandabidozee .

Not if though, just when I would have thought.

 

[cloud]

website looks awful in my opinion. spend that much on a domain and so little on web design bonkers.

Minging design and also they've decided to go with oh so fashionable male hatred for the marketing video. Quite distasteful.

 

[twostepsbehind]

I just can’t fathom why the buyer didn’t get the .uk included in the deal at a price like that

The can be updated easily and cheaply, but someone else launching something similar on free.uk can’t be changed without even more cash

 

[Rossy]

Virtually no end-users are investing in .UK domains. I mean, why would they? The only people picking them up are pretty much resellers hoping they can resell them to the .co.uk owners.

This appears to be an end-user purchase based on the price, so would likely have no use or need for the .UK extension.

Long term investment.
For now .co.uk is mainstream, but this will probably change during the years (10+?) as .uk would be more common.

 

[dee]

You can't just say 'will probably change' without any basis for it.

Of course you can't. You also can't say it won't be true, so it's a calculated risk. If I can get hold of domains now for 100 quid that are potentially worth thousands in a few years when the only additional cost is say £5 quid a year average for renewals, then it's a decent risk. You can also develop them if decent, so no brainer I would have thought.

Long term...as we know... shorter is also generally better.

Out of interest @Trauiner , do you hold any uk's at all ?

 

[Rossy]

You can't just say 'will probably change' without any basis for it.

Sounds like someone buying cheap .uk domains, because they're cheap and just being hopeful that it will come true. Just not based on anything other than gambling.

The numbers of .UK domains, and the amount of end-users actually using them, is showing that virtually no-one is interested in them.

The base is there, it's available, companies are currently starting to use it.
And it's widely known that domain values go up as domains get shorter.

And of course they are cheap, the demand is low at this moment. This definitely will not mean it doesn't change during the years (bitcoin, anyone?) and will be more generic like almost every other existing ccTld.
So it's make a lot of sense to invest in .uk right now, cheap and quite plausible it will change in the future.

 

[dee]

True, but you usually make calculated risks by looking at numbers and data. Not just by pulling thoughts out of thin air and making a gamble based on that.

Have you never bought a lottery ticket ?

Possibly, but given what gone on in the last year, I suspect it's not normal. I doubt there are many business spending big on domains. There could also very easliy be a tipping point. Lets say Google, then BBC switch to the UK. Not saying they will, but could happen. That could change the perception of joe public pretty quickly. I think it's slowly creeping in anyway. I see uks more and more on vans, flyers etc

 

[Chris Holland]

I just can’t fathom why the buyer didn’t get the .uk included in the deal at a price like that

Because the buyer most likely didn't even ask for it. I'm fairly certain that the savvy seller of free.co.uk would have been willing to throw in the .UK if the buyer had said "£200K or so for the pair, take it or leave it". If a buyer doesn't ask though, there aren't many that would take the time to apprise them of the situation and then offer them a domain that they didn't even know about five minutes before and at no additional charge.

In his book The Art of the Deal, the now rather unpopular Donald Trump narrated how he received an unprecedented 40-year tax break from NYC to build his first hotel there. An incredible deal that has so far made him over $450 million and still makes him money to this day. A fellow major property magnate at the time asked him "how on earth did you persuade the city to go for a 40 year deal". Trump replied “because I didn't ask for 50".

Despite Nominet's previous proposals that were cited as the justification for launching .UK. i.e. that it would be positioned as a premium brand with a raft of value added features including enhanced security features, secure DNS and premium marketing etc, it was yet another ruse to enable Nominet's robber barons to trouser additional millions to augment the millions of pounds that they've already squeezed out of their, and make no mistake folks - it is indeed "their" de facto if not de jure, extremely profitable not for profit cash cow. Snouts to the trough lads! And ladette, not forgetting Eleanor of course. Oink!

 

[twostepsbehind]

Because the buyer most likely didn't even ask for it.

View attachment 3114

Fully agree with this, it's almost a certainty the seller would've sold both for the same price if that was the final offer - you don't ask you don't get...

It does, however, mean someone could buy free.uk and takeover this chap's entire brand - and to some (including me free.uk just feels better than free.co.uk)

If someone is going to throw this much money into a domain, they have to secure the brand at the same time...

 

[Chris Holland]

It does, however, mean someone could buy free.uk and takeover this chap's entire brand - and to some (including me free.uk just feels better than free.co.uk)

If someone is going to throw this much money into a domain, they have to secure the brand at the same time...

I couldn't agree more. How ironic that they could have had FREE.UK for FREE!

Their expensive mistake will cost them an absolute minimum of £100K at some time in the near future, and that's only if Anthony is in an extremely generous mood on the day. If they wait more than a year, and of course by that time they'll be far more vested in the brand than they are now, they'll doubtless have to pay more for the .UK than they did for the .co.uk. Especially as AAA is by a huge margin by far the most bullish on .UK of any of the major players. For all the buyer's boasts about being "net savvy", they have demonstrated that, for now, they are spectacularly NOT net savvy. I'd imagine that will soon change but what an expensive lesson it will have been for them.