In an article titled “8 Facts About Choosing The Right Domain Name” Bradley Glonka used the words domainer and cybersquatter interchangeably, “In some cases, you may discover that the domain name you want is owned by someone called a “domainer” or “cybersquatter” – a person who registers tons of likely-to-be-desired domain names to sell them at a serious profit.”
The above mentioned quote was apart of fact #7, the article discussed things like owning more than one domain, but not too many. It also talked about age of the domain and why privacy is a waste for a business.
I thought what was interesting about fact #7 was that the author pulled the number $400 as a common asking price from a domain seller. I did think it was nice that Bradley took the time discussing multiple domain ownership and paying a premium are usually left out of many non domain industry articles.
Here is #7 from the article:
7. Pay a premium for your coveted domain name.
As you shop for the ideal domain name, you may discover that the URL you’ve selected has already been spoken for, like detroitdentists.com. You can reach out to the domain owner to see if you can purchase the domain directly – but this move is only worth pursuing if there is not a functional website at the domain. Otherwise, you’re likely out of luck and will just be wasting your time. What is a good use of your time and money is having an intermediary reach out to do the negotiations for you. Domain owners can incorrectly sense big profits when approached directly from a buyer and may not be willing to sell at a reasonable price.In some cases, you may discover that the domain name you want is owned by someone called a “domainer” or “cybersquatter” – a person who registers tons of likely-to-be-desired domain names to sell them at a serious profit. A few years ago, Apple won a case for the domain name iphone5.com before they even had a product by that name. Cartier, Dior, and Swarovski all have filed suits against cybersquatters. Even politicians run into issues with domainers who register all variations of that person’s name in order to make a quick buck (or perhaps it’s a competitor gearing up to do some negative campaigning).
In short, this secondary market is lucrative. So how much is your desired domain worth? Well, it’s worth as much as you’re willing to pay for it. It’s not uncommon to have a domainer ask $400 for the domain name you want. I would pay that price for a good domain name all day long because, in the long run, it’s worth it. More sought-after keyworded domains can command thousands of dollars – again, I would consider paying this price. If it comes to negotiating with a cybersquatter for your desired internet territory, once you have the domain and deal in place be sure to use an intermediary monetary transaction service like escrow.com. Tread carefully and keep your eyes open for any shady deals.
Read the full article on Huffington Post
The guy who wrote that is as knowledgeable & qualified to write about domains as I am to blog about quantum physics.
That’s enlightening. Do you have a quantum physics blog?
We have to educate these people! Mr Bradley Glonka I invite you to come to the VII th European Domain Conference in Valencia, which takes place from 23rd to 25th of April. We will exactly explain you what a CyberSquatter is.
I think this guy’s son, who is in the second grade, wrote and submitted this article as a class project.
how come Huffington Post published is a mystery.
“It’s not uncommon to have a domainer ask $400 for the domain name you want.”
Lol, what? More like “it’s not uncommon to have a domainer ask $100,000 for the domain you want”. I don’t think I’ve ever sent an inquiry that was returned with a $400 quote.
On reading the article, I am pretty sure this guy has a passing familiarity with the domain industry and what domain investors do. He is, Bob, qualified enough to write about the subject matter and present it to the public, but he had limited space to make his points. He also falls short on some of his specifics, and his effort to relate some of those issues to the public seems to add confusion rather than ameliorate it.
What he failed to address, in the broadest sense, is what constitutes a generic domain name, one that anyone may buy at any time. He never quite addressed the full issue, although he did come close in his first point.
On that point, Mr. Glonka is certainly not qualified to pick a good domain name, if his example of a so-called good domain is glonkadetroitlaw.com, which he says tells the user who, what and where they are. Sure it does. So does thatdetroitlawfirmtwoblocksfromthegmbuilding.com, which is actually easier to remember. The component of easy recall is one he missed completely. Is Glonka spelled with a “K” or a “CK” or a “C”? Ask that last question aloud.
Mr. Glonka is not alone in such disastrous domain picks, however; the domain industry littered with people who pick really lousy names. I’ve done it. He would have done his readers well to have spent more time expounding upon the memorable and generic aspects of a good domain name, but perhaps he is not familiar enough with that point, though he came close, as I mentioned.
Relating all this information to the public, however, Mr. Glonka avoided discussion that differentiates domain investors from cybersquatters, perhaps because he didn’t want to confuse the reader. If that was his motive, the layman will perceive this to be a good analogy. But the layman doesn’t understand any of these points, lest he be reading this post as a purely academic exercise – we are doing it, after all. The analogy is incorrect, of course.
Consequently, Mr. Glonka’s efforts result in improperly associating the broader industry professionals with the trademark-infringing cybersquatter. It was a clarification that could have been made with one sentence, but the writer chose, instead, to lazily commingle the legitimate with the unethical. Curiously, though, he referenced those “trademark squatters” when he cited the iphone5.com case, his only direct example.
He correctly observes that when people sniff more money on the table, they naturally raise the asking price. This is capitalism, and that’s fine. It’s even been discussed at the domain conferences, where domain investors, themselves, try to remain as anonymous as possible in negotiations in order to buy low and sell high! That is the reason we’re in the business, after all.
The long and short of my little commentary is that Mr. Glonka stops short of truly explaining much. He provides salient points for consideration, and provides a starting argument. It is a classic example of what I call “content light,” a problem as pervasive online today as those dime-per-impression pop-us of the early 2000’s.
A nice commentary that understands that recognizes that this is just what it is. A quick glance summary that basically suggests – don’t register the first thing you can, consider help, and there are people selling for profit (to different degrees). It’s a huff piece. It’s not intended to be thorough and researched expose of the domain industry… that would be a good read though if done properly.
Most of what I see on domain blogs are puff pieces, smoke blown up whatsits, and the occasional lamenting that “we are not understood” as legitimate business.
Your sensible reaction here is almost cockle warming.
I welcome all commentary that sheds light on the little-known world of domain names.
it’s basic information, but a few valid points, especially the concept of geo/keyword domains.
In spite of the SEO crowd who seem hell bent on the need to denigrate the best ever performing web addresses in favor of fanciful, meaningless (keywordless) names that only their magic can save from search engine purgatory.
Not true, never was but the baloney prevails, and those silly made up (but cheap) names continue to provide a faint but lost cause to those who refuse to believe in the value of a premium intuitive, exact search term domain. Worth paying for?….yup and you can take this to the bank…….it will be the best investment you will ever make in support of your business enterprise.
The storm clouds of serious antitrust enforcement are on the horizon and the day of “search engines rule all”
will draw to a close as greed, anti-competitive behaviour, and manipulation of search results is banished from the web……….or so we can hope!
Just my thoughts…..
…
This is a guy who needs to create a quick article, took a crash course, probably cut and pasted some, speed scanned over some content etc…
There are only a few truthful facts, but calling someone that owns a few names a cyber squatter? It is clear that is a term for ppl who trade on trademarked domains, after that this person has no credibility, and did very little research on this childish article.
Quite unprofessional. But that’s “journalism” today. That he insinuated a parallel between “domainer” and “cybersquatter” in the same sentence shows either intentional ill will or ignorance. The article read very much like a biased opinion piece …
“If it comes to negotiating with a cybersquatter for your desired internet territory, once you have the domain and deal in place be sure to use an intermediary monetary transaction service like escrow.com. Tread carefully and keep your eyes open for any shady deals.”
@ Hello Craig
R. E. = ” The storm clouds of serious antitrust enforcement are on the horizon and the day of “search engines rule all”
will draw to a close as greed, anti-competitive behaviour, and manipulation of search results is banished from the web……….or so we can hope!
Just my thoughts….. ”
You and everyone else will soon know that the DNS or (Domain Name System Hierarchy) is being destabilized via GOOGLE and now the Eu is Wrapping up an Anti Competition charge. All gTLD participants and their accessory to aiding and abetting Googles assault on DNS Nuetrality is becoming more public. This is not going to be pretty for new gTLD adoption. Google is already backing off more and more new gTLD auctions and on the Quiet buying .COM Plaform Extensions, Do you know about this ? ( of course they will deny this publicly but behind the curtains they will look out for themselves) they always have and always will.
Also GOOGLEs support of the DNA will be yanked in our opinion. This is an early warning system of the coming Perfect Storm fast approaching the new gTLD Gamble. Hope your not too involved ? Just an early warning theres a storm front coming and the white water is rising. JAS 4/1/15
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)
Danny, your comment is longer than your hair!!!
I’ve done some preliminary searching, but can’t seem to find the lawsuit mentioned in the article about the the iphone5.com domain name. Would appreciate it if someone can send me a link or refer me to a case no. Thx.
D2012-0951. Terminated. No decision:
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/case.jsp?case_id=23709
Thx, John. Am I missing something? The case was terminated but the author of the Huff Post reported that Apple won the case before rolling out the Iphone 5? Hmmmmm
Hello MHB, Ray, Jamie,
GOOGLE, Small Business’s Largest Predatory Threat, to Online Business Expansion.
Search Engine Marketing, is only a futile attempt to control and mitigate maximum Online Business Expansion on a Global Basis. Its concept is to Dilute corporate Brands drawing power and to control access to online businesses, so as to charge exorbitant fees as a gatekeeper with manipulative codes blocking the pathway to Online Businesses. Sound Sinister ? Yes , Is it going to be allowed forever ? NO
All Domain Name System Hierarchy Extension owners. Make no Mistake about it that the real threat to DNS Hierarchy comes from Googles assault to destabilize the whole DNSs Nuetrality, through deceptive Anti-competitive Digital Code Manipulation within their Monopolistic Garden Maze of twisted Digital code designed to mitigate and block the finding of Online companies according to fair and free market standards.
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)
Hi Jeff. I am..com with a touch of. Ca
I do agree with the perfect storm concept. SO much money at stake in the search/display business model. Look out!
Somewhat surprising that more domainers don’t comment on the world wide attention (google)
Is receiving from majjor regulatory agencies. The outcome will affect all search engines and no doubt some categories of domains will win and some may lose.
My money is on generics and exact search term.
Any thoughts? Craig
@ Hello Craig,
We think GOOGLE needs to be thrown under the Bus in order for True Optimal Online Business Expansion ! Jim Cramer is right.
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)