The Social Security administration published the most popular 1,000 boy and 1,000 girl baby names for 2011, on Monday.
It probably won’t surprise you to find out the all 2,000 .Com domains are taken.
Some popular baby names are also the names of cities like Brooklyn and Madison while others are also three letter abbreviations.
Yet if you search through the list you will find many of these baby names used by brands and many are trademarked like “Michael”
We ran the list to see who owned the .com domains of the matching 2,000 top baby names and found that:
Worldwide Media, Inc, d/b/a MostWantedDomains.com owns 96 of the domains.
Tucows.com owns 82 of the domains.
Frank Schilling’s NameAdministration.com owns 44 of them.
42 are owned by clients of the brad protection company CSC Corporate Domains
27 of the domains are owned by clients of the brand protection company MarkMonitor.com
25 are owned by Anything.com.
30 are owned by domain name giant Scott Day’s company DigiMedia.com
9 are owned by Future Media Architects
24 appear to be owned by Vertical Axis Inc.
Other company’s owning some of the 2,000 domains are Marchex and Buydomains.com
Many of the registrations are under privacy so its impossible to account for all.
If you own some of these domains for bragging rights feel free to disclose in the comment section.
Here are the top 10 boy and girl names for 2011 and who owns the .com:
| Rank | Male name | Female name | ||
| 1 | Jacob | Jacob & Co | Sophia | Sophia Holdings |
| 2 | Mason | Chad Kissinger | Isabella | privacy |
| 3 | William | MicroStrategy, Inc. | Emma | MicroStrategy, Inc. |
| 4 | Jayden | Worldwide Media, Inc | Olivia | Olivia Companies LLC |
| 5 | Noah | Kroening, David | Ava | Alexander Valley Association |
| 6 | Michael | MicroStrategy, Inc | Emily | Bluehost.com |
| 7 | Ethan | Mediatrope LLC | Abigail | privacy |
| 8 | Alexander | privacy | Madison | Madison Newspapers, Inc. |
| 9 | Aiden | Aiden Co., Ltd. | Mia | privacy |
| 10 | Daniel | Emerson | Chloe | Nom IQ Ltd/Com Laude |
Damn babysquatters! Who could do that to a child? Here’s more from Rick’s Board circa 2000
SQUATTER – In the old west land was freeuse for anyone. But, the cattle owners didn’t really want freeuse; they wanted cattle range use. So, when a family put up a fence and tried to live on the land used for cattle movement and grazing, the family was called “sqatters” run off the land by cattle barons. Many times the family was burned out and murdered. “Squatters” was a meaningless vulgarity – a hate word for soothing the concience of a murderer. The family was completely within its rights to live on the land. The land was free for the taking and use and ownership. If a family chose to put their time and money in the land, it was their land. And, a cattle baron was free to graze and cattle drive. Of course the cattle baron did not stay on the land like the family and hence the conflict. Domain names do not compare. It is a fight for permanent possive ownership – period. Only in the case of patent or trademark is there a dispute. Otherwise, whoever invested their money first and registered the name, owns the domain. “Cybersqatting” and “squatters” no more applies in the case of nonpatented or nontrademark domains than does it apply to someone who bought a parcel of land on speculation next door to a gigantic expanding corporation.
The good news is that you made a nice post, Mike. The bad news is that only 4 out of these 20 are developed in any way. Yep, 20%. Until this stops, it’s difficult for domaining to get any real traction in the creative development community. Sadly, the 20% statistic ( and even less!) holds true for the premium .com’s in general.
These kinds of names are invaluable. Developed, they could fetch a lot more money. Maybe 100 times, depending on traffic and type of traffic. But it looks like 10 of those will go wasted in the lifetimes of the owners who are waiting for an over-substantial pay-out. A really sad thing where creativity should reign over “holding”. Yes these are investment type names, but how long can anyone sit on these? The internet landscape changes quite quickly. Patience? Sure? Overly patient? Can happen. It would be nice to see a few of these names exchange hands and the new users develop them into brands. Such a waste of such great names, IMO.
@ Berkens
Interesting. FYI, I greatly suspect that most if not all of the 82 “baby name” domains that we at Tucows own are surname domains in our Personal Names service. It is not uncommon for first names to also be surnames. Which is how you end up seeing kids named:
Alan Lisa
and
Lisa Alan
And to correct the inevitable Tucows haters before they chime in, we *purchased* the majority of our surname domains from another company as part of a corporate acquisition. They did not come from the Tucows expiry stream.
I registered Jonathan.com for my son in the 90s and passed up many offers telling potential buyers that I was waiting for my son to grow into the name. He really doesn’t know what he wants to do with it but doesn’t want to sell it. Go figure.
@Michael
Hey, that’s one of the few who hold premium domains generationally. That’s something different. Can’t fault you for doing that for your son. Makes sense.
I’m talking about “holding” companies that COULD develop but don’t. Waiting for the lottery, IMO. Holding companies work by mathematics and that is the business model. Fine. But what does it do for the internet space? Nothing. Profit is the objective, understood. But without development there is nothing contributive to speak of. The bottom line of everything is creativity. You have a band and you, I’m sure, understand that better than most. Otherwise it is only a fantasy. Why not find the buyer at a reasonable price and move on? This is how life works. The movement of commodities is what makes an economy rich. That’s fact. It would be great to see big .com holders moving toward creativity. Sitting makes things dry and old. Without economic movement, things have a tendency to die. That’s a fact. Investment is a moving phenomenon. Let’s see some of these names go for nice prices and get developed…
I own the #2 female. Maybe a future buyer has been born. 🙂
I have owned at one point and recently (within the last 4-5 years sold)….
Jacob.com
Laura.com
Derek.com
Jeremiah.com
Marilyn.com
Doug.com
Gregory.com
etc etc etc there are 4 more which I cannot mention due to NDA.
I am not aware of anyone public any way who has sold more popular first names than I in the last 5 years.
How did Rick Schwartz miss this??
When considering in 1996 he was the only person out of 6 billion in the world to know the future value of domain names and the future of the internet.
It’s hard to comprehend.
@MB, curious what type of value you would put on Olivia.com both reseller and end user?
I am about to offer another top name this coming week and curious how the bigger guys feel about valuation.
Assume top name, much better than 1,000 lol and good traffic/ovt and nearly 20 years old.
My past experience as you can see above in the reseller market andsales like Katie.com show reseller pricing in the $55k-$95k range.
Thanks, Josh