
Realizing domains still sell for 800k+ has changed my domain squatting tactics - _eht
I recently saw the thread about a company using part (or maybe all) of their series a funding to purchase the domain name covers.com for $825,000 dollars.  (https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=18534468)<p>Neat! And excellent news for me as a domain collector. I also use the term collector because while I average holding ~150 domains at any given time (including my prized possession, e.ht), I rarely set them up to be exposed on a potential market. Anyone who has shown interest in a domain did the dirty work of figuring out how to reach out to me.  This has worked out and I&#x27;ve actually sold quite a few to some noteworthy groups. For example, the Mormon church sent a broker after LDSMatch.com, and i was able to have a great ROI on a domain that cost me a handful of years worth of ICANN fees.<p>Fast forward to today. I have a domain that is currently being chased by a Godaddy broker representing a client. It&#x27;s a good domain, consisting of two words and a .com. My intentions before I read about the covers.com sale were to accept the second offer (I typically ignore the first fishing offers), but woke up this morning and changed my email draft.   If a single word .com is worth sub one million dollars, with every other TLD option out there right now, two word .coms are definitely worth at very least more than four digit offers.  Change my mind.
======
bsvalley
People like you make our lives really painful... I wish there was a rule
saying that if a domain name has been purchased and hasn't been used after X
months, then it should be automatically cancelled and available for other
people to use.

Just to avoid domain squatting.

~~~
_eht
What am I actually doing to make your life painful? Let's say I collect beanie
babies because I really just like them. I'm not in control of the market
supply or demand, so when someone wants to approach me with a $10k offer for
my Princess Dianna 1st edition, sudden;y I'm the bad guy for displaying it on
my shelf?

~~~
pritambaral
Does the fact that you have a Princess Diana Beanie Baby, 1st Edition mean
that no one else has one, or can have one without buying it from you?

~~~
_eht
I don't quite understand your question, but I'll take a stab at it. When art
prints are limited to 1 of 10, does it mean the 11th person is SOL? I'd say
yes, unless one of the 10 relinquishes ownership in one way or another.

~~~
pritambaral
You're only stretching already over-stretched analogies. Art prints are not,
by their nature, limited resources, nor do they hold important inherent value.
Housing, public transportation, land etc. are better analogies to specific
domain names. The ethical ramifications of a person hoarding a specific piece
of art and a person reserving and not using seats on public transportation are
quite different.

~~~
_eht
You’re really going to compare domains with their near infinite options in
both Tld and address characters to a seat on public transportation and
affordable housing? I’m just embarrassed for the argument at this point.

~~~
pritambaral
1\. I'm not comparing domain name availability to anything. Rather, I'm
pointing out flaws in your analogy, comparing your analogy to other things,
and trying to show you a wide spectrum of resource availability. 2\. Domain
names are not random addresses, they're identity, and thus severely
constrained. Yes, if one wanted a random domain name, they have near-infinite
options; but not every domain use-case is such. Not even the dominant use-case
is such. Squatting on a domain name is an effective way of squatting on the
online version of a real-life identity. Compared to trademark squatting,
domain name squatting is trivial. Needless to say, both practices are
extortionary.

~~~
_eht
I want to continue this conversation because it is actually of interest to me,
and you seem equally as passionate.

Let's find some common ground first. I get really annoyed when I am domain
hunting for a service/app idea and the domain is not in use, has never been
(from what I can tell) and has a huge 'BUY THIS DOMAIN' banner waving about.
So then it's up to me to determine how badly I want it, and if I want to
participate in the ecosystem that is domain name resale. I think we can agree
on that.

I don't, however feel like I'm entitled to it just because I may have a better
use case for the domain. At risk of being too analogous, I'll take the example
x.com. I would love to own x.com and I believe my business 'X Industries'
would greatly benefit from having it, and a room full of people could probably
agree that my use case would be better than what the domain has served for
most of it's life (a 200HTTP status and an 'x'). What is the solution?

Is stricter domain regulation the key? And if so, how do we backstep that to
the creation of DNS and domain registration? On top of that, who enforces it?
The US, or some other neutral entity? I think you know where I'm going here. I
guess rather than saying collecting/squatting/holding is bad, and people are
entitled to domains they can put to use, what do you imagine in the perfect
domain market?

You also mention 'online version of a real-life identity'. Do you imagine this
extends to account handles on Twitter, Instagram, et al? If I own
username.com, and someone else owns @username, is that similarly an issue?

------
mtmail
> I also use the term collector

And in the title you use "domain squatting tactics". It sounds like you
buy/register domains purely for profit, so squatting seems a good term.

~~~
mcv
Squatting sounds like he's using it without having paid for it. This is the
opposite. This is domain name speculation.

------
sharemywin
What does it say?

[https://www.godaddy.com/domain-value-
appraisal/appraisal/?ch...](https://www.godaddy.com/domain-value-
appraisal/appraisal/?checkAvail=1&tmskey=&domainToCheck=cooldomain)

I added dummy value.

~~~
Veen
I wonder how accurate these appraisals are? I've bought a few two-word .coms
over the years for projects which have since lapsed (like a travel blog).
According to this they're worth a few thousands dollars and I have no real use
for them.

------
1337biz
This reads like a diary entry. What do you want to ask / tell / share with us,
except that domains are bought and sold?

~~~
mcv
Maybe he's fishing for an offer on e.ht?

~~~
JustSomeNobody
I don't understand why this domain is "prized". Is it because it is a single
letter?

~~~
_eht
It's personally prized because I've been a domain geek since I knew what
domains were. No inferred value to anyone else.

------
angersock
Domain squatters are scum. You're scum. Congrats.

~~~
Veen
This attitude puzzles me a little, especially on Hacker News where there is a
good-sized contingent of libertarian free-market types. Domains are an asset
with value. What's wrong with buying them and then selling them for as much as
you can. How does it differ from the sale of any other item or piece of
information with value?

~~~
true_religion
Domain names are an artificial monopoly that does not work, unless we all
agree to play fair.

Otherwise, Oracle could have bought every common word domain at the birth of
the internet.

~~~
angersock
Well put.

