Monetisation is the best use of a generic domain

[cherrytron]

I'm just putting this out there, you can throw rocks at me after.

I believe that monetisation of a generic domain, in the form of PPC or directory listing model is a fairer use of a domain than a single 'related business' owning said asset for self promotion.

Eg. If Plumbers.com.au was owned by someone who allows all plumbers to advertise / be listed (for a fee or otherwise) it is fairer than AAA Plumbing Co of Victoria* using it just to advertise their business who only service the Melbourne CBD area.

I really hate how the term 'monetisation' is used and seems to be a dirty word when talking about domain names.

I believe every .com.au website is created for the purpose of monetisation no matter what you do with it, because if you were a business legitimately buying under policy, then no business spends money making a website just for shits and giggles, every website is created to make money (which by 'make money' is my interpretation of the term 'monetisation').

Can anyone give me an example of a policy compliant, .com.au purchase they consider not to be "monetised"?

*Fictional business

 

[Timmy]

+1

 

[Bacon Farmer]

I'm all Adam Smith on this one.

The most lucrative model will win out because an internet directory company will eventually buy plumbers.com.au from Bogan Suburb Plumbers Pty Ltd** or they will do it themselves.

Whats fair got to do with it?

** Probable true name of some Victorian plumbing company.

 

[Shane]

I agree regarding generics.

But I disagree regarding the use of the monetisation term. The majority of bricks & mortar businesses use their website as part of their marketing rather than actually selling directly from the site.

The website doesn't actually make money for the business, it mearly promotes the business which makes money from selling goods or services. The only way the website makes money is if you're selling advertising (or have affiliate links) on the website.

I see it as being no different to a catalog or flyer produced by a business, but you'd never say someone was "monetising" their catalogs. The only time you would consider using that term is if you were selling space within the catalog, and therefore making money from the catalog as opposed to making money from selling goods.

 

[cherrytron]

Whats fair got to do with it?

Really just sick of seeing the word (monetisation) used negatively when realistically it is probably the "best and fairest" model for the general public.

When Joe Public wakes up to the internet and all of these plumbers come online looking for leads because no one uses the Yellow Pages (what?) anymore .. I think they would appreciate being able to buy a spot on Plumbers.com.au instead of seeing it owned by some other fairy who's locked it up for themselves.

I mean, I am no idiot either, sure Mr X the Brisbane plumber could just say to Mr AAA in Melbourne ... I'll pay your web hosting if I can get a little ad on your site that says 'Looking for a Brisbane Plumber' etc etc - but who knows, plumbers might not think like that or know if it can even be done .. and mostly likely would appreciate the 'wizard' sign up of Adsense and thus a PPC type model.

Bah.

 

[cherrytron]

I see it as being no different to a catalog or flyer produced by a business, but you'd never say someone was "monetising" their catalogs. The only time you would consider using that term is if you were selling space within the catalog, and therefore making money from the catalog as opposed to making money from selling goods.

Fantastic response, thanks. So by that rationale, if Sony buys an ad in a magazine, that 'marketing' is being monetised by the magazine publisher, but if Sony sends a catalog to me directly, that form of marketing is not being monetised by the printing company / letter drop company / mailing company etc?

Seems strange.

Do you suggest that if the Sony website sells items online, it is monetising their domain, but if they were simply showing me what products they have available (like say, what Gerry Harvey does) then they are not monetising it?

I believe "marketing" is simply a "step" in the monetisation process.

If I sold art online and I had a cart where you could click the one you want and then check out and I send it to you - how is that really any different from you just giving me a lead / phone number and then I call you, take your credit card details and then send you the painting? Just because the transaction or act of money exchange or "earn" doesn't happen instantly, surely does not mean that it is not monetised?

 

[cherrytron]

It is almost like monetisation is defined as "if the website somehow MAKES MONEY without actually selling a tangible item or service" (ie. not selling advertising)

Advertising/Marketing companies do not provide a service, they should all be NFP organisations.

 

[Shane]

The definition of monetisation is essentially to turn something into money.

You can turn a section of your website into money by selling that space as advertising to someone else, but using the website to promote the sale of your own products is simply not monetisation. You don't make money from promoting your goods, you make money from selling them.

You are monetising your goods or services, but you are not monetising you website.

Get it?

I'm not going to argue definitions with you, go and study business and you might learn something.

 

[cherrytron]

U mad brah?

 

[Shane]

U mad brah?

Nah, just procrastinating here on the forums because I'm in the office doing an assignment late on a Saturday night!

All good.

 

[cherrytron]

ok cool, wasn't arguing the term with you, but with the haters of generic domain monetisation

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Nah, just procrastinating here on the forums because I'm in the office doing an assignment late on a Saturday night!

All good.

CFP? That sucks.

 

[Honan]

............................

Can anyone give me an example of a policy compliant, .com.au purchase they consider not to be "monetised"?

*Fictional business

Yes, all the domains that don't resolve, yet meet the policy, because they did NOT use the monetisation reason to register
Here are some:
fuel.com.au
detail.com.au
schools.com.au
births.com.au
shoppingcentres.com.au
metal.com.au
drains.com.au
salt.com.au
tourist.com.au
sister.com.au
stones.com.au
show.com.au
engineers.com.au
back.com.au
chemists.com.au
arts.com.au
recycling.com.au
success.com.au
coachhire.com.au
process.com.au
verse.com.au

Copied from
http://www.netfleet.com.au/backorder

 

[OzDomains]

The end user will always benefit from owning this domain rather then setting it up as a directory. From experience it is very difficult to get advertisers to pay for this type of listing.

Say if you do get 200 (very unlikely) plumbers to pay say $100 each per year, this would be $20,000 per year.

If one plumber had the domain I'm sure they would have sales well over this.

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Here's some food for thought:

35,000 subscribers @ $149 pa

 

[Search]

Here's some food for thought:

35,000 subscribers @ $149 pa

Hmm 2008 article.

I wonder if Naturaltherapypages is feeling the impact of the recent improvements to Google local search and the Google Places expansion?

 

[James]

I think businesses are becoming a bit more savvy, back a few years ago people would pay silly amounts to be on directories now even the big boys go looking for the free directories I mean why go pay for something like Nat pages which is 149 a year when you can be on hot frog for pretty much free. The real money makers are sites like True local which hit you up for fees but these sites do not really drive quality leads imo their are 100s of more effective ways for small business.

 

[Shane]

I agree, all of those directory sites are rubbish.

Last year I paid to be listed on financialplanners.com.au (an OMG site) and it was a complete waste of money. I've had a few of their emails which say "a user has just requested your phone number" but haven't had a single contact result from it.

Hopefully any SEO benefit has made the $200 or so worthwhile!

 

[Bacon Farmer]

One, rubbish seems a bit harsh. financialplanners.com.au ranks 3 for the keyword financial planners and it seems you at least got some interest plus as you say some seo benefit.

How many referrals would you need to make your $200 back?

How do you reckon it compares cost and benefit wise to other advertising you did?

If the directory isn't on the first page of Google then the cost should be a hell of a lot lower which is probably why hotfrog is free. Naturaltherapies you will notice also does a lot of ppc where they don't rank.

As always cost v benefit. A couple of hundred is peanuts compared to yellow pages though I'd rather spend a couple hundred on a mini site.

 

[cherrytron]

Would be good if directories offered bidding type software to allow you to move up the list - that way the market can decide the value of the listings.

The directory stuff started when I left, so I don't know if OMG charge the same amount for a listing on financialplanners.com.au compared to paintbrushes.com.au or something? If so, then you will definitely be being ripped on some of their directories as traffic volumes and "job" prices (cost per lead) will be considerably lower for certain topics.