.org.uk and .uk

[websaway]

The problem with the domain market is actually that it is not more like the property market. There is no point in property seller asking a price well above current market value, because buyer will find an alternative.

But the domain buyer often desires one name far above all others. Seller has monopoly powers. Therefore, income is maximised by refusing to sell at near current market prices, and selling only to buyers who, due to some special need, are willing to pay a multiple of market price.

We can tell that many domainers are overpricing due to the miniscule proportion of stock that many turn over each year.

I do have some sympathy for the view that domain values are underappreciated, and therefore accepting market price may be to sell cheaply. Though am not convinced that domainers, controlling a scarce resource created primarily for development rather than speculation, should have the right to make that call. Certainly not to the extent that some do, whereby prices may be dozens of times higher than would be seen at auction.

That's not right is it, in fact it's the opposite to what you say about property.
It is a fact that if buyers cannot get the same property they want elsewhere which suites their requirements, then that pushes the price of the property up.
Yes if you want to live in an ordinary street in a large city most properties are the same and your analogy works, and the same will be with domains, if it's not a desired quality domain then there are lots of options and the ability to get the same meaning in another form will create competition and reduce the price. If however you want a one word domain that there is no alternative to, you will have to pay the price because of competition to own it.

 

[Stephen]

Options

I agree on the second sentence but don't see the point of making up an example. However if you insist this is made up - teaspoons.co.uk (£1,250).

Honestly, not too hard to find what look to be vastly overinflated prices if you look through the selling sites of some portfolio holders.

Stephen.

I have seen these UK generics priced at these high levels for years, the client does have a choose of lots of FTR .co.uk with a extra single suffix or prefix word in this case.

These high prices that are being asked for make the client very happy when they see most the domains being sold with 2 words are only £100 - £300.

A note nobody seems to be offering any criticism to the .com holders, were there landing page for teaspoons.com states " Please note that any offer to purchase this domain name must exceed $2,000 USD"

Also the teaspoons.ltd.uk is available to register if they are really keen.

I don't see blackmail with this domain or trademark infringement and to the 3 manufactures of teaspoons in the UK and/or some graphic design agency that wants a "funky name" £1,250 is a reasonable/good price.

To the rest of us, it is over priced for what we would be able to use it for and would look for an alternative domain and think no more about it.

 

[websaway]

I agree on the second sentence but don't see the point of making up an example. However if you insist this is made up - teaspoons.co.uk (£1,250).

Honestly, not too hard to find what look to be vastly overinflated prices if you look through the selling sites of some portfolio holders.

Stephen.

That's really helpful because to me, that name, even at that price prior to negotiation, is not extortionate and the buyer is certainly not being held to ransom.

 

[Stephen]

tea-spoons.co.uk

If it was a little tea shop somewhere interested then I imagine they'd consider the price to be extortionate. Perceptions of value will always differ between interested parties and casual observers.

(from iPhone)

Agree for that purpose it would be expensive but potentially still commercially viable as it has been pointed out that is the starting price,
but I would suggest the tea shop register the FTR tea-spoons.co.uk

 

[websaway]

If it was a little tea shop somewhere interested then I imagine they'd consider the price to be extortionate. Perceptions of value will always differ between interested parties and casual observers.


(from iPhone)

Hypothetically speaking this name would hold no value to a tea shop other than the inherent asset value of the name. Therefore you could understand them not wanting to pay the asking price simply to invest in the name, they would become a domainer.
On the other hand it's a snip for a teaspoon manufacturer who could see a return on investment through marketing as well as still retaining the underlying resale value in the name.

 

[websaway]

Agree for that purpose it would be expensive but potentially still commercially viable as it has been pointed out that is the starting price,
but I would suggest the tea shop register the FTR tea-spoons.co.uk

So long as they are given fair warning that if they build a successful business as a cheap short cut on the hyphenated version, it's no good crying in a few years about someone who owns the unhyphenated version holding them to ransom.

 

[Stephen]

just gone!

So long as they are given fair warning that if they build a successful business as a cheap short cut on the hyphenated version, it's no good crying in a few years about someone who owns the unhyphenated version holding them to ransom.

....wait tea-spoons.co.uk has just been registered, sorry tea shop!

That's the problem with domains if you don't get in first somebody else will.

 

[anthony]

...So while it's fine to argue the toss about the last 1.4%, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that "virtually all" existing registrants are protected by V3. From that point of view, it's a good solution with a few inevitable exceptions - not the disaster being portrayed by the tone of many of the posts on this thread.

I do love the way you have whittled the affected domains down to 1.4%, perhaps I should make it clear that the 1.4% will still be 1.4% whether it is all .org.uk domains affected (as is now) or whether aged rights were introduced, therefore the same quantity of .co.uk domains then become affected.

Within that 1.4% is a huge number of .co.uk domains that have been caught by domainers over the last 10 years or so, let's not lose sight of that fact!

 

[righthand]

It is a fact that if buyers cannot get the same property they want elsewhere which suites their requirements, then that pushes the price of the property up.

Indeed but not to anywhere near the same extent. Someone may love a property and pay an 20% extra for it, but ask a multiple of auction/market value and they will quickly go elsewhere

lots of options and the ability to get the same meaning in another form will create competition and reduce the price.

But sellers often set a blanket minimum price, knowing that every once in a while they'll hit the jackpot when someone who has already named his business comes along and wants the exact match. Or might have limited naming choices for some other reason, and be willing to pay handsomely even if the name is obscure and of little value to anyone else.

This sort of opportunity is rarely available to the property owner (when it is, it's called a ransom strip).

Another key difference is that property speculators tend to rent out, so at least they're using productively in the meantime.

 

[AssetDomains]

I do love the way you have whittled the affected domains down to 1.4%, perhaps I should make it clear that the 1.4% will still be 1.4% whether it is all .org.uk domains affected (as is now) or whether aged rights were introduced, therefore the same quantity of .co.uk domains then become affected.

Within that 1.4% is a huge number of .co.uk domains that have been caught by domainers over the last 10 years or so, let's not lose sight of that fact!

And let's not forget a lot of these domains have since been bought on the after market by end users something nominet themselves suggested they do on a great place to be.
Org.uk owners have been clear they were buying a secondary extension all along.
It would have been ludicrous for nominet to then tell the people who bought the prime extention on the aftermarket they were going ahead with a release mechanism which handed the prime extension to probably another domainer using the org.uk extension outside its intended purpose

 

[anthony]

...let's not forget a lot of these domains have since been bought on the after market by end users...

But they haven't. In the 10 years or so of catches i've watched, most are still with those who caught them, not end users!

...going ahead with a release mechanism which handed the prime extension to probably another domainer...

That is exactly what is happening now. Remember, that 1.4% has within it a higher than normal proportion of .co.uk domains caught by domainers. In effect, Nominet are handing them the ultimate 'dividend' over more rightful .org.uk owners!!

 

[markb]

I agree on the second sentence but don't see the point of making up an example. However if you insist this is made up - teaspoons.co.uk (£1,250).

Honestly, not too hard to find what look to be vastly overinflated prices if you look through the selling sites of some portfolio holders.

Stephen.

As I am a business owner and not a domainer, when I first joined this forum, I really hated domainers. I only ended up joining the forum because I was interested in a domain that I wanted and the owner wanted £10k for it which I didn't think it was worth. I think I came on here for advice.

Since I first joined I have now bought quite a few premium domains and spent well over £100k on them. They have all been bought for future development projects for my company.

I no longer hate domainers and can see that they do invest a lot of time and money in the domains they hold. Its only similar to car registration plates, where companies buy them and sell them for a profit.

In regards to your teaspoons.co.uk example, I think this price is pretty cheap and no-one is being held for randsom neither do I think its over priced. There are many alternative domains people could use instead of this one.

 

[websaway]

Indeed but not to anywhere near the same extent. Someone may love a property and pay an 20% extra for it, but ask a multiple of auction/market value and they will quickly go elsewhere



But sellers often set a blanket minimum price, knowing that every once in a while they'll hit the jackpot when someone who has already named his business comes along and wants the exact match. Or might have limited naming choices for some other reason, and be willing to pay handsomely even if the name is obscure and of little value to anyone else.

This sort of opportunity is rarely available to the property owner (when it is, it's called a ransom strip).

Another key difference is that property speculators tend to rent out, so at least they're using productively in the meantime.

Have to disagree, property prices in London have rocketed out of all sensible proportions (London could hardly be defined as a ransom strip ) simply because of demand. If there is a strong demand for something it will always reflect in the price.

High quality domains are not infinite in availability which is similar to London property, so therefore the asking price by those owners will reflect that.

You'll need to elaborate on hitting the jackpot and be more specific.
If someone names their new business news ltd and then goes and asks to buy news.co.uk they can expect to be quoted a high price, naturally.

 

[websaway]

It occurs to me that the people who complain most about domain prices in the secondary market are the very people who seek to gain financially from their acquisition.

 

[markb]

As you may know, "domainer" is an invented word, with no qualified definition. Would you say you are a "domain name investor" amongst other things?

Yes, I would definitely class myself as an investor of domains now, as I have invested a lot of money. When I say "domainer", I mean someone who buys them to sell.

Cheap compared to what and for whom? For you? For everyone? Obviously there are usually alternatives. However why is teaspoons.co.uk worth that figure?

I can see that this isn't cheap to everyone, but I would class it as a premium domain. If someone couldn't afford a premium car, they would look for a cheaper alternative. At the end of the day, a domain owner can ask for whatever they like for one of their domains. However I do see quite a few domain owners asking unreasonable amounts for their domains, as I have been interested in a few before and offered what I thought was a good price and they have turned round and asked for 10 times the amount I have offered. I can see that it is very annoying, but if they don't want to sell for a cheaper price, well that is their choice. Some people can be pretty greedy. But domains are extremely unique, so I guess this gives the seller the upper hand.

 

[Brassneck]

I didn't think brassneck was on about serious premiums. Obviously most people are ultimately out to make something out of being the registrant of a domain name.

Correct. I think everybody understands the value of super premium category killer domains.

I think the point I was trying to allude to earlier is that it might be more helpful to us all if there was a more liquid market for decent usable domain names. Over the years I have sold hundreds of names in the mid XXX range - generally business end users can see that I am being fair and I am happy that I made a decent and fairly quick return on my original purchase. Would rather sell 5 per cent of my portfolio per year at those rates than <1 per cent playing the lottery ticket hording approach.

I honestly think that more sensible (and to the general public more reasonable) pricing across the board could be a win-win all round.

Stephen.

 

[websaway]

Correct. I think everybody understands the value of super premium category killer domains.

I think the point I was trying to allude to earlier is that it might be more helpful to us all if there was a more liquid market for decent usable domain names. Over the years I have sold hundreds of names in the mid XXX range - generally business end users can see that I am being fair and I am happy that I made a decent and fairly quick return on my original purchase. Would rather sell 5 per cent of my portfolio per year at those rates than <1 per cent playing the lottery ticket hording approach.

I honestly think that more sensible (and to the general public more reasonable) pricing across the board could be a win-win all round.

Stephen.

Again it would be interesting to see examples of the £500 domains you have sold, and an indication that the sale is free standing and not linked to charging for other services in conjunction with the sale.

I don't see much difference between a 500 and 1500 pounds domain sale. It will all depend on date of registration, quality of name, and potential competition from purchasers.
If the sale to an end user is quick and efficient it's worth not haggling about the price to save time and labour costs.

 

[websaway]

Yes, I would definitely class myself as an investor of domains now, as I have invested a lot of money. When I say "domainer", I mean someone who buys them to sell.




I can see that this isn't cheap to everyone, but I would class it as a premium domain. If someone couldn't afford a premium car, they would look for a cheaper alternative. At the end of the day, a domain owner can ask for whatever they like for one of their domains. However I do see quite a few domain owners asking unreasonable amounts for their domains, as I have been interested in a few before and offered what I thought was a good price and they have turned round and asked for 10 times the amount I have offered. I can see that it is very annoying, but if they don't want to sell for a cheaper price, well that is their choice. Some people can be pretty greedy. But domains are extremely unique, so I guess this gives the seller the upper hand.

What was the domain, What price did you offer and what did the 10 times amount to ?

 

[mdb]

"But in the same sentiment as above, there are small business owners who are essentially locked out of owning the "best" commercial property in central London because some developers were / are asking wholly disproportionate asking prices, obviously going on the faith that the land will mature."

Why are domains magically a different class of asset, for which the laws of supply and demand need not apply?

I don't think any small business owner would ever expect to own the best commercial property in London, end of

That's actually an apt example given what's being talked about right now re land that's being sat on and the need for more houses. There's increasing noise from MPs on all sides on the land-lock issue. So long as new developments don't take place it keeps prices / rents high and property developers happy. It has stifled the recovery though, so in this example each to their own what they think is best.

It's a fair enough argument though... I think in most instances domainers know a ballpark figure for what their domain is worth, or the successful ones will work with a buyer for mutual interest. What gets me is how some domainers have fanciful ideas on valuations and they hold absolute power to lock out a business which has a generic name and was established way before .co.uk existed. They're small businesses without trademarks and copyrights. For that business, owning the .co.uk could be very progressive for them, and better for the majority.

Using the same case I mentioned, even the business owners themselves made mistakes about their own web / email addresses, obviously their customers did too. It was just pure luck they were able to eventually get the .co.uk then plain sailing...

In fact it's an interesting point. That .co.uk domain on the one hand was one day worth 10,000s to the first registrant, yet he eventually dropped it? So assuming he didn't die, was it really worth that? Nope. You don't have a high-value plot of land for sale and then suddenly abandon it?

In a similar instance I owned a .com that a US hotel chain wanted. We did a deal, they hung on to it for a few years, did nothing with it and dropped it... I got a legal enslaught from a corporate over two other .com registrations. It wasn't abusive imo, the absolute opposite - I was helping their customers fix their products that their services centres couldn't fix. I didn't argue it, but for several reasons that business never recovered with the new domain I moved to. The original domains were FTR within a year or two. They could have worked with me on a transition, but nope... So, happy to see their share price is squarely in the toilet Meanwhile, their competitor took a much more pragmatic approach over how their brand is used online by its customers. Its value is now x 20 higher than it was then. Happy I invested in them

So what makes domains different... I think maybe it's because of that element of irrationality, or that there's still some of the Wild West to play out. Other mature markets don't have this, but they all have to start somewhere. You don't have a young inexperienced guy who can (with such low barriers to entry) waltz on to Average Street (note, not Oxford Street) buy a plot of land that can only realistically be used by one company for one thing and then hold that company to ransom... Yes, DRS affords some protection, but it's not absolute.

Granted I'm not a domainer though. I'm sure you guys will be able to tell me about the positives, and if 98.6% are truly going to be happy with the way .uk will be roled out, I suppose on balance that's more than enough for peeps like me to lump it, if they have to. I personally thought there would have been more disgruntled .org.uk registrants... Not that the majority will probably know they'll be disgruntled... yet.

Just like in most things in life we need protecting from outrselves.

The bottom line, I fail to see how locking up a .co.uk / .uk domain for 3, 5 or 10 years, which locks out a legitimate business owner from using it, and as a consequence it essentially forces them to reconcile between an inferior .co.uk or an inferior .org.uk is good business.

However, these guys on here are not acting in the interest of British business, UK domain requirements or anything else, they are acting in their own interests.

I truly feel sorry for you Edwin. You're diligently flogging a lot of dead horses all the time;

It's a question of morality. If I asked special interest groups in Washington and Pakistan over the use of drone strikes I expect I'll get different arguments. Then if I asked a wider populist view I'd get another answer. I think registrants should have been given a voice in all this? Maybe they were, but I can't recall this one being offered to put his views into the consultations.

... it would be helpful if when posting about being held to ransom you could show examples of the quality of the domains you are referring to.

Can't divulge the exact domain... brilliantconstructionservices.co.uk would be a near enough example in the case I'm referring to. I said at best it would be worth low xxx in an auction, not 20k, so my client went for .org.uk at the time. Now they own both.

Though am not convinced that domainers, controlling a scarce resource created primarily for development rather than speculation, should have the right to make that call. Certainly not to the extent that some do, whereby prices may be dozens of times higher than would be seen at auction.

+1

Its only similar to car registration plates, where companies buy them and sell them for a profit.

Yes, but registration plates don't help facilitate business. My reg number is immaterial to someone in the other side of the world who I am trying to communicate with. Domain names aren't a commodity to be admired, they're too intrinsically linked to the wellbeing of the wider economy.

If there is a strong demand for something it will always reflect in the price.

I suppose that's my point, there isn't always strong demand. Well there is, it just comes from one person / company, and he can't compete with anyone else to bring about an indication to a seller of a fairer, more realistic price the buyer / seller can negotiate on.

If someone names their new business news ltd and then goes and asks to buy news.co.uk they can expect to be quoted a high price, naturally.

Agreed, anyone starting a business now should factor in domain names when it comes to choosing a name for their company.

It occurs to me that the people who complain most about domain prices in the secondary market are the very people who seek to gain financially from their acquisition.

I'm not complaining about the secondary market on the whole, as I said I think most domainers are rational and I certainly don't object to the business model. I have a problem with irrational idiots who control power and their one folly ruins it for a majority of others.

Since property has been used as an anology, should we talk about compulsory purchase orders? (Now, where did I put my Iron Man suit?)

Would rather sell 5 per cent of my portfolio per year at those rates than <1 per cent playing the lottery ticket hording approach.

I honestly think that more sensible (and to the general public more reasonable) pricing across the board could be a win-win all round.

+1

 

[Edwin]

mdb, are you talking about "generic" domains or domains that actually map directly to the (non-generic) business names of particular businesses.

I'd really like to understand what kinds of names (I don't need examples) you feel are being blocked from use in this way.

If they're the kind of names that the current owners (the ones holding them for resale) would be a toss-up to lose in a DRS action, then I can fully appreciate your irritation - I dislike cybersquatters too.

If they're generics, then that's just market forces.