Is A Domain Hack Worth 10x More Than The Correct Domain? Banco.co Vs. Ban.co

by

One of the results that caught my eye coming out of the .co Land Rush auctions was the result for Banco.co a natural domain compared to Ban.co a hack.

Both domain names were the subject of Land Rush auctions but the results were quite different.

Banco.co sold for just $2,300 a couple of weeks ago, at a land rush auction but the auction for Ban.co just concluded with a sales price of $24,500 more than 10X the sales price of the “correct” domain.

So is a hack worth 10X more than a natural domain?

You tell me

About Michael Berkens

Michael Berkens, Esq. is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheDomains.com. Michael is also the co-founder of Worldwide Media Inc. which sold around 70K domain to Godaddy.com in December 2015 and now owns around 8K domain names . Michael was also one of the 5 Judges selected for the the Verisign 30th Anniversary .Com contest.

Comments

  1. Einstein says

    Mike, for many people $24K is nothing so you really can’t compare or call it a trend. Or it maybe a lot but call it as a start up cost.

  4. jp says

    It’s not a valid experiment. It’s also 3 letters vs 5 letter, and “ban” is a generic term on it’s own. I see what you are getting at but too many variables this time

  5. Matt says

    hacks arent worth more than original. dunno what people are thinking. But there is really no way to appraise a .co at this time or in time to come. I feel that once things pick up more and the registars hit over a 2 million then we will finally see the real values of the .co era. As of right now its simple, whatever people want to pay for a .co they will pay. I only got a handfull of .co and really have no way of putting a price on them. Like stumble.co I have no real way of putting a price tag on it.

  6. Russell says

    Ban.co is a hack of Banco.com, not Banco.co

    Would you also be surprised if blo.gs sold for more than blogs.gs?

  7. Aniol says

    Dont forget one factor: These auctions were closed to public. How many bidders were in each of these auctions? The auctions with 2 end users go through the roof (see Mesothelioma.co), the others end with a good price for the buyer.

    The question is:
    Was banco.co an opportunity or bad investment in comparison to ban.co?

  8. Em John says

    Personally, I would rather have “banco.co” because essentially it is “bank company”. I think the person who got that got a HUGE deal considering this is one of the biggest Spanish keywords and after all, .co will do a lot of business in its own country. Ban.co was surprising because we figured it might go for $18000, taking into consideration many other hacks we’ve seen.

  13. Jim Fleming says

    What IF .CO had been the dominant COmmercial TLD for decades and .COM was just now being introduced ?

    Would .COM be “allowed” into the private ICANN Root ?

  14. MHB says

    Jim

    If .Co existed as a TLD rather than a ccTLD and someone wanted to sponsor .com as a TLD then I would say no .com would not be allowed.

    However if .com was a country code (which it would not because all country codes are 2 letters) then no one could stop it from coming in.

    ICANN has no control or authority over ccTLD’s just TLD’s.

  15. Jim Fleming says

    @MHB

    With all due respect, all that “ccTLD and Country Code” mantra was made up.

    People could claim that Bill Gates started .COM and .EXE with DOS.

    Actually, Gary Arlen Kildall the creator of CP/M was instrumental in starting the 3-letter DOS file extensions.

    By the way, there are 3-Letter Country Codes from the same organization that produced the 2-Letter Country Codes… used by Jon Postel as a convenient jump-start.

    At the IGF in Europe that is winding down, people are now finally talking about IDN ccTLDs being “different” from ccTLDs (2-Letter ASCII Variety). That will pave the way for all 50 U.S. State TLDs. Florida .FL Texas .TX .ETC

    It is all just made up.

  16. Jim Fleming says

    {{Actually, Gary Arlen Kildall the creator of CP/M was instrumental in starting the 3-letter DOS file extensions.}}

    Note, we are now into 2010, a new century and decades.

    Don’t be surprised if people pop up in Internet Forums and ask, “What is DOS?”

    We also will likely have people who DO NOT view “The Internet” as TCP/IP.

    As Service-Based Networks emerge, IANA, ICANN, ISOC, IETF, ETC will go the way of DOS.

  17. Slate says

    Or even better, who here knows ARPANET (the invention of the internet)?
    Not many people at all knew the first internet was developed in the early to mid 60’s during the cold war.
    It held a different purpose then it does now. From there you can even trace the origins of .COM and .NET (again different purpose then what they are now).

    I just thought I would add to the comments.

    Cheers

  19. Jim Fleming says

    @Slate

    “the first internet was developed in the early to mid 60′s during the cold war.”

    Here in 2010, if you ask people “What is THE Internet…”, they will describe WWW, Digital TV, text messaging on cell phones, video game LAN parties, DLNA, etc.

    They describe the [[ Service-Based-Networks ]] from the early 1980s… or Picture.Phone from the New York World’s Fair in 1964.

    TCP/IP and ARPA, DARPA, DOD, IANA are not essential, neither is X.25.

  20. Slate says

    “”TCP/IP and ARPA, DARPA, DOD, IANA are not essential, neither is X.25.””

    Essential or not, its still part of the history and development of the internet as it is known today.
    Just like .COM was not created to be an COMmercial extension. It was later branded as the commercial extension because of the number of businesses that used it as such.
    Most people dont know that .NET is the same age as .COM.

    Does anyone remember back in the late 80’s when the Berlin wall came down and the internet went up. Back when chat rooms where cool.
    Does anyone remember hearing or seeing for the first time a company advertisement that had “”You can also find us on the internet at www (dot) some name (dot) com.
    I remember that. I remember being thrown off by that, saying to myself “what the hell are they talking about”?

    Ahhhh fond memories.

  22. Slate says

    Yup I agree with breaking news on that comment.

    I would be backing .COM at that time as making a real run at becoming a valuable extension. Its a little backwards in thinking and doesn’t present all the same benefits and prospects .CO nor would it have the all the same recognition globally that .CO has. It would still be fresh and have some meaning as long as it was marketed correctly.

    I don’t think there would be as much enthusiasm behind .COM as .CO has now, but there would still be a following.
    Makes you wonder though, Would people start the mantra that .COM is only good as a typo for .CO? LOL
    I know there would be some people out there that would try to push that tired old thought. Still its kind of funny.

    Just the way I see it
    Cheers

  24. Jim Fleming says

    “that’s why .co will never become/sell like .com”

    What IF (another big IF)… either via market forces or legislation .CO and .COM are forced to MERGE into a flat name-space with no TLD ?

    Or, will a new Layer of User Interface emerge which, when faced with just a name…. presents a dialogue to the user…
    …
    Are you looking for FamousExpensiveDomainName.CO ?
    or FamousExpensiveDomainName.COM ?
    …
    vISPs with Set-Top-Boxes will LOVE to have a new dialogue with the users… and display ads…

  25. Slate says

    “”yes, but there is no space in the market for two top TLD exactly like there is no space for two Charlie Chaplin or two Neil Armstrong””

    Again I agree with you.
    The market for the top dog in regards to TLDs, is pretty much set up to only “MAINLY” one TLD.
    I do agree with you in that statement.

    Where I differ from you is more so in “”that’s why .co will never become/sell like .com””
    As I pointed out (in some other post), most outside .COM extension registrations and searches have been going up at astronomical rates. Even .ORG (who is pretty much regarded as the 3rd stepchild extension) is an older extension who is still seeing 12% growth in searches. There is still large amounts of room for growth.

    I (not being blinded by my convictions to any one extension… because I own more .COMs then I do .COs… and that is a fact) can see that with over 80,000,000 registrations already, that .COM has started to taper off.
    If you follow trends there is something called the Classic “S” curve. It pretty much follows the pattern from when some thing goes from virtually non existent to being around 80-90% of the market share (critical mass/maximum exposure).

    Its a law, everything advancement follows this same path. When ever something hits this magic number. It will tapper off in frequency then shortly after be replaced by something new.
    Its a known fact that .COM makes up 83% of the searches and a vast majority of the domain names currently on the web. If it has not already began to taper off and level out, it will sooner rather then later.
    At that point its only a matter of time until something else comes along and dethrones the present king.
    It has happen in every industry. Look at the phone (first a operator, then rotary, then push button, then cordless, then cellphones, now smart phones).
    Do I need to continue?
    The TV (first it was photo tube black and white, then came technicolor, then came flat screens, then came LCD/HD, Now 3d is making its way to market)

    The point is that over time the standard will change. If you want to be on the money making end, you must catch the ride at the beginning of the “S” curve and ride it up. If you get in too late, well you lost out.

    Right now, .CO is a SPECULATIVE extension. I am SPECULATING that it MAY be the extension to push its way to the top. It may not be hence its SPECULATIVE.
    One thing I do know for sure is that sooner or later (probably sooner) **SOMETHING** or some extension will come along and dethrone .COM as the king extension. There is no other way about it.
    The world will continue to progress and what is popular today will go the way of the dinosaur tomorrow.
    The question is, where will you place yourself when the time comes.

    Just the way I see it
    Cheers

  26. $$$$$ ::: Google - The Movie ::: $$$$$ says

    .

    “What IF (another big IF)… either via market forces or legislation .CO and .COM are forced to MERGE into a flat name-space with no TLD ?”

    it would be GREAT since a no-TLDs (and no http://www.) Web is what I suggest/advocate from years!

    unfortunately, it will never happen, since too many (the domains owners as first) don’t want that change

    .

  27. $$$$$ ::: Google - The Movie ::: $$$$$ says

    .

    “What IF (another big IF)… either via market forces or legislation .CO and .COM are forced to MERGE into a flat name-space with no TLD ?”

    it would be GREAT since a no-TLDs (and no ht tp: / /ww w.) Web is what I suggest/advocate from years!

    unfortunately, it will never happen, since too many (the domains owners as first) don’t want that change

    .

  28. Slate says

    I would love that change….
    Just need to be one of the first to register…. Wooo talk about competition.
    That would be sweet

  29. Gazzip says

    “Banco.co sold for just $2,300 a couple of weeks ago, at a land rush auction but the auction for Ban.co just concluded with a sales price of $24,500 more than 10X the sales price of the “correct” domain”

    “So is a hack worth 10X more than a natural domain?”

    How do you know that each buyer has the same thing in mind for the 2 domains, what makes you think than Ban.co is a hack of Banco.co ?

    Either way I doubt that a hack would be worth more than a natural generic domain 9.99/10 times anyway 🙂

  30. MHB says

    Gazzip

    “How do you know that each buyer has the same thing in mind for the 2 domains”

    I don’t

    What makes you think than Ban.co is a hack of Banco.co ?

    I was in both auctions and that’s what I looked as it as.

  37. Domo Sapiens says

    A perfect example of the Irrationality behind -most- of the .co purchases…
    Even the people from Colombia and spanish domainers in general have shunned them.

    To the people that are heavily invested in .co’s :

    What are your plans for your premium .co’s?

    1)Develop ?
    2)Wait and pray for a “Bigger fool” ? (respectfully)
    3)Let them gradually become the “Not the next big thing” a la .mobi , .info, .tel , .us, .eu etc etc ?
    or…?

    *This is not an official poll.

  38. Gazzip says

    I only bought one .co domain at the standard/over inflated reg fee

    I’m going for option 2)

    Wait and pray for a “Bigger fool” …or a richer one who wants to develop it 🙂

  41. Soud says

    In my opinion yes, I think a domain hack is more eye catching and is easier to remember because of it’s creativity with the hack, internet users will tend to have curiosity of what that website is.

  45. We Got COmpany says

    The other thing that makes domain hacks valuable is that for every extension there are a counted number of dictionary words that suit it as a hack and that’s it. It would be even greater if that dictionary word is from the dictionary of the language of the domain;

    for example;

    if “XXXES” is a word in the Spanish dictionary and “YYYES” is a word in the English dictionary, then xxx.es would be more valuable than yyy.es coz the hack matches the language of the extension.

  50. .Me of course says

    .co is not hack per se. many .es are. but they so are .se (ofcour.se) for instance.

    the best hacks, or jingles are those .me and .ly – that read much more natural.ly

  54. Claudio says

    Great Aguascalient.es

    Other “.es” hack geodomains

    Londr.es Cann.es Seychell.es UnitedArabEmirat.es Antill.es UnitedStat.es BuenosAir.es Philippin.es ….