V-V-V-Voom! and Not Much Else (Expired Domain Note)
Suppose the major marketplaces stopped showing sales results. How would that affect the domain industry? Keep reading …
The most conspicuous feature of expired domain sales for the past week is the complete absence of GoDaddy data. Following downloading information for roughly a thousand auctions, I was surprised to see only mid-auction snapshots for upcoming items – meaning that there was not a single actual past auction result.
At first, I thought this might be due to a snag in my code; but it isn’t. Right now, the “Watching” tab at GoDaddy shows only listings that end in the future. Once the auctions have ended, it seems their records will vanish. Until now, data on past auctions was visible for a full week. (Raymond Hackney noticed this problem yesterday, as it turns out, although I didn’t notice that he’d noticed it until I began looking for confirmation.)
At this stage, I don’t know whether this represents a GoDaddy glitch or a systematic policy change. We’ll find out in a few days, once employees return from Christmas vacation. It would be unfair to leap to conclusions; so technical difficulties are the prudent assumption.
Still, this raises an notable question: How would we react were GoDaddy to turn off the lights on auction results? Compared to other expired domain market places, GoDaddy has been more transparent, allowing even non-bidders to track an auction. NameJet and DropCatch require a bid to view the outcomes. Meanwhile, other sites such as SnapNames and Pheenix keep auction results private. Even those bidding must be present in the final moments of an auction in order to learn its closing price.
We’re accustomed to seeing sizable retail sales noted by DNJournal and others. Yet it’s only below that $2,000 .COM reporting threshold that we’ll find most of the domain market’s wholesale activity. All of us rely on GoDaddy Auctions for evidence of what’s going on in today’s market, both since of the platform’s size and its transparency. That could go away.
Moreover, in the dark it’s easier to get away with murder. Ours is a largely unregulated industry. One of the few deterrents against fraud of various kinds is bright lighting. When auction results are published, they can be interrogated. So, for all these reasons, I hope GoDaddy will reverse its glitch / policy decision, as the case may be. If you feel likewise (or otherwise), please leave a comment.
This stretch, there’s nothing from GoDaddy. Nevertheless, we still have highlights from NameJet. These 15 sales are drawn from just a 5-day period since my last article:
| Domain Name | End $ | Domain Name | End $ |
|---|---|---|---|
| VVVV.com | 22100 | RealCasino.com | 4500 |
| SkyRiver.com | 3602 | Payola.com | 3190 |
| ChuanShen.com | 3048 | WideScope.com | 2120 |
| YouMove.com | 2000 | MRCM.com | 1242 |
| PixCo.com | 1060 | Overflows.com | 776 |
| HugeSaving.com | 517 | CouponPromos.com | 419 |
| NCOF.com | 295 | DomainNameJournal.com | 250 |
| KeyMarker.com | 232 | Look Directly | Above |
I knew that VVVV.com ($22.1k) would be sizable sale, having previously sold LLLL.com myself. What can i say? V-V-V-Voom! Gambling domains frequently sell above what comparable names would fetch in other niches. RealCasino.com ($4.5k) is a case in point.
ChuanShen.com ($3k) is a common first and last name, although I’m not aware of any particularly famous Chuan Shen. MRCM.com ($1.2k) matches a .CA and an .EU site. Personally, I think HugeSaving.com ($517) sounds awkward without a final “s”. But I quite like the brand names Payola.com ($3.2k) and SkyRiver.com ($3.6k).
Speaking of market transparency and noted sales, Ron Jackson over at DNJournal purchased DomainNameJournal.com ($250).
