Failed business ideas... Many suburb+trade domains on today's list

[Drop.com.au]

It always interests me when I spot something in the drops list that highlights (more often than not) a failed business venture or idea.

A few years back there were over 70 domains that featured Walmart in the domain, that expired. They were names like (from memory), walmartsucks.com.au, walmartchildlabour.com.au etc...

They were all registered by Walmart via MelbourneIT, as a protective move to protect their Walmart brand. What is interesting about this is that when I was at the ICANN Paris, in 2008 (yes tough life), I was chatting with someone that told me about the tender Walmart had distributed that related to this very same domain drop I had recently witnessed.

So, the back-story was that Walmart was getting 'heat' about their business practices, so they decided to proactively register a bunch of domains to remove these domains from circulation. The tender included most of the popular ccTLDs. The person I was speaking with had actually tried to win that tender, which was worth a lot of money.

Now, with respect today's drop I see something interesting again. There are a whole stack of suburb+trade domains expiring.

EG:
AlbanyCreekElectrician.com.au
AlbanyCreekElectricians.com.au
AlbanyCreekPainter.com.au
AlbanyCreekPainters.com.au
AlbanyCreekPlumber.com.au
AlbanyCreekPlumbers.com.au
AlbionParkElectrician.com.au
AlbionParkElectricians.com.au
AlbionParkPainter.com.au
AlbionParkPainters.com.au
AlbionParkPlumber.com.au
AlbionParkPlumbers.com.au

This is repeated over many suburbs, and I lost count / interest at over 100...

I don't know the back story on this one yet, but it is clear that someone spent a lot of money, (in the thousands) on domains that clearly were not worth renewing. I have no idea how long these were registered, and whether they actually went through a number of renewal cycles (if so, then the cost goes up with each renewal cycle), or just one 2-year period.

Maybe someone on DN Trade can shed some light?

I liken looking daily at the Drop list for the past 5 years or so, to looking at the obituaries for many failed business ideas. Sometimes I can even visualize a bunch of mates at a BBQ exploring a "great business idea" over a beer. Ideas are plentiful, but you always need to be prepared to do the hard work too!

Best Regards,
George Pongas

 

[Oz.]

Very true. Exactly how I see the drop list, like a daily f*ckedcompany.com (if anybody here remembers that site - which is also f*cked now) list of f*cked companies/dreams/ideas.

 

[snoopy]

Expect to see this featuring the term "3d" is a couple of years.

 

[Data Glasses]

at this point i am happy to hold 3dwebsite/s/com/au although happy to agree that domains like 3dsport3d may end up in the junk bin

yet in the usa seems to be many geos like above nycplumber/com or seattleelectrician/com ......etc etc

 

[snoopy]

yet in the usa seems to be many geos like above nycplumber/com or seattleelectrician/com ......etc etc

Big difference between albany creek plumbers and nyc plumber. Population of 15,000 versus 8 million. Then you have big income/wealth differences as well.

How many plumbers does albany creek need? Maybe 2-3 dozen? What is the chance of any of them being interested in the name to warrant registering it for $10/yr? Very minimal in my view.

 

[WG2010]

Keep in mind, many of these suburb based locations have google local listings at the very top of the serps and the organic listings are below the fold on my laptop. That's why I've avoided location based URL's for the aussie market. Compare "driving school" with "sydney driving school" to see what I mean.

Because of that, I don't think they have any value if at all any.

 

[DavidL]

Keep in mind, many of these suburb based locations have google local listings at the very top of the serps and the organic listings are below the fold on my laptop. That's why I've avoided location based URL's for the aussie market. Compare "driving school" with "sydney driving school" to see what I mean.

Because of that, I don't think they have any value if at all any.

Good point

 

[James]

I have a rule with domains, if it does not make the money for renewal costs in a year I will drop it..It also pushes me for 100% development =) I mean I have domains which make their renewal cost in a day, some in a month some in a year lol

I mean I have about 75 domains in my inventory not much but 95% make their renewal costs =)

 

[snoopy]

I have a rule with domains, if it does not make the money for renewal costs in a year I will drop it..It also pushes me for 100% development =) I mean I have domains which make their renewal cost in a day, some in a month some in a year lol

I mean I have about 75 domains in my inventory not much but 95% make their renewal costs =)

I think this a good rule to have. Personally I try to keep the names that make less than reg fee to a minimum as well, under 10%. Really think twice before renewing those names.

 

[Shane]

I'm trying to get all of my domains to the point where they pay their reg fee, but only about 10% of them do. Thankfully some of them pay for much more than their reg fee, so that subsidises the rest of the portfolio.

It's all about having the time and patience to work through them all I guess.

 

[DavidL]

I think this a good rule to have. Personally I try to keep the names that make less than reg fee to a minimum as well, under 10%. Really think twice before renewing those names.

That's a pretty tough rule and ignores the 'investment class' domains. plenty of domains may well be worth $XXXX+ in anybody's conservative valuation but still return negligible revenue.

 

[snoopy]

That's a pretty tough rule and ignores the 'investment class' domains. plenty of domains may well be worth $XXXX+ in anybody's conservative valuation but still return negligible revenue.

If the portfolio is generating a profit each year from resales then that is another thing entirely. But if someone has a whole lot of names not covering the reg fees but hopes one day they can be resold that is a recipe for disaster in my view.

Even for the names that can definitely be sold for something today but don't produce revenue, I wouldn't want to be holding a portfolio mainly consisting of names like that personally. I don't really think the owner is going to get ahead unless there is some kind of fairly reliable revenue stream coming in (through sales, parking, development etc).

 

[snoopy]

I'm trying to get all of my domains to the point where they pay their reg fee, but only about 10% of them do. Thankfully some of them pay for much more than their reg fee, so that subsidises the rest of the portfolio.

It's all about having the time and patience to work through them all I guess.

Would be doing a bit of culling here. If 10% is subsidizing the other 90% then surely you'd be far better off just holding mainly the profitable names and focusing on those?

 

[Shane]

I agree. I have let around 20 expire so far this year, but often I'll look at a domain and think about letting it expire, then come up with some great idea for development... but the development doesn't happen!

I had set a target of developing one domain per week, but it's difficult to keep up the consistency.

 

[soj]

I had set a target of developing one domain per week, but it's difficult to keep up the consistency.

Outsource, if it costs you $200 to have someone else develop a site, and you could get that $200 back in even 3 or 4 years, then that is a good ROI of about 25%. Not much in the online world, but in the real world, 25% and you would have money being thrown at you left right and centre.

Otherwise you just end up with a bunch of undeveloped names not making any money. I used to be like that, but learnt that spending money helps make a lot more money in the long run.

 

[DavidL]

I look at it like investing in stocks and shares:

1) You have your high yeilding stocks that deliver revenue (like Telstra)
2) You have your solid low-yeilding but steady growth stocks
3) You have your speculative stocks that will either boom or bust

And, as investment advisors always say, it's good to have a balanced portfolio!

For me personally, with domains, if I'd culled non-income producing domains, I would have ditched domains like BondiJunction.com.au (these are the equiv of 2) above) and CloudComputing.com.au (this is an example of 3) above)

 

[snoopy]

I look at it like investing in stocks and shares:

1) You have your high yeilding stocks that deliver revenue (like Telstra)
2) You have your solid low-yeilding but steady growth stocks
3) You have your speculative stocks that will either boom or bust

And, as investment advisors always say, it's good to have a balanced portfolio!

Not many advisors would tell you to put 90%in the speculative stuff, that isn't balanced, a single figure % is probably balanced. I'm saying myself I keep the stuff that doesn't earn its keep to about 10%, even then I probably keep more than I really should.

For me personally, with domains, if I'd culled non-income producing domains, I would have ditched domains like BondiJunction.com.au (these are the equiv of 2) above) and CloudComputing.com.au (this is an example of 3) above)

Is there something wrong with selling names like that? (if someone had a portfolio of mainly names that didn't make money for them).

 

[DavidL]

Not many advisors would tell you to put 90%in the speculative stuff, that isn't balanced, a single figure % is probably balanced.

Yes that's probably about right. I'd have about 10% that I'd judge as pure speculative. 50% revenue positive and remainder somewhere inbetween.

Is there something wrong with selling names like that? (if someone had a portfolio of mainly names that didn't make money for them).

What do you mean? By cull, I meant let expire not sell, right?

 

[snoopy]

What do you mean? By cull, I meant let expire not sell, right?

I'm not suggesting that people should let names expire that are worth something. By cull I mean get rid of, drop or sell depending on the name.