Nearly 200 domain names registered connected to the royal baby
- Thread starter Cal
- Start date
findtim
Top Contributor
Why on earth would anyone think that one of the richest families in the world, knowledgable about technology ( because of scandal after scandal ) , who are the ONLY people to know the name of the child before anyone else would NOT have registered the domain name they want or even bother to do so !!
200 domains on drops next year. wasted money.
tim
200 domains on drops next year. wasted money.
tim
johno69
Top Contributor
Quality.
It was getting about 8,000 hits per day few days ago, traffic has died down a bit. Newspapers keep covering the story, good for domaining in general I guess. Any publicity is good publicity.
In regards to your comment Tim, the Royal family aren't the only possible end users for this name.
Babynames.co.uk is a big potential end user.
Paddypower.co.uk who was taking bets on the name, another potential end user.
This name generates free news publicity.
You just need to think outside the box. Any marketer will tell you that the quickest way to riches is to find a trend and jump in front of it. People have been doing that for years, because it simply works.
Obviously only the best .com has this power, the other 200 are pretty useless I agree.
Babynames.co.uk is a big potential end user.
Paddypower.co.uk who was taking bets on the name, another potential end user.
This name generates free news publicity.
You just need to think outside the box. Any marketer will tell you that the quickest way to riches is to find a trend and jump in front of it. People have been doing that for years, because it simply works.
Obviously only the best .com has this power, the other 200 are pretty useless I agree.
neddy
Top Contributor
So are you proudly associating yourself with this gentleman? Or is that you?
http://www.theage.com.au/digital-li...ebsite-name-20130726-2qnwj.html#ixzz2a5gm51I8
What a load of crap. This sort of action does responsible domainers a great disservice.
And if you want to get yourself on auDA's radar, try doing that sort of thing here in Australia and see what sort of reaction you get.
Imho.
Shane
Top Contributor
I'm not sure that you want to be taking financial advice from marketers...
CyberClick
Top Contributor
Good luck to the domainer. He's not breaking any laws, he put his money down and took a risk. Plenty have done the same and lost their money. Pretty sure the royals could stump up the $8 to register it if they wanted to.
We need to move on from the 'cybersquatting' fear and smear. If you want the domain register it, if not then don't. If someone else has a domain you want either buy it or go with another one.
Cybersquatting is a fabricated term, made up by people who were too lazy or slow to register the domains they wanted.
We need to move on from the 'cybersquatting' fear and smear. If you want the domain register it, if not then don't. If someone else has a domain you want either buy it or go with another one.
Cybersquatting is a fabricated term, made up by people who were too lazy or slow to register the domains they wanted.
payattention
Archived Member
I don't see how anyone can label this squatting when it's just a name. Personally I think anyone excited at the idea of a royal baby needs their ****ing head checked.
neddy
Top Contributor
Righto Troy - good to know where you stand.
All I would say is insert these two words into Google:
auDA cybersquatting
neddy
Top Contributor
Just on a lighter note, Elliot Silver of Elliot's Blog gave Luc Biggs a guest post so that he could try and do a PR fix.
http://www.elliotsblog.com/guest-post-george-alexander-louis-domain-name-0834
And then Domain Shane cracked everyone up with this parody of that post!
http://domainshane.com/serial-investor-domain-shane-offers-serial-investor-luc-biggs-his-domain/
http://www.elliotsblog.com/guest-post-george-alexander-louis-domain-name-0834
And then Domain Shane cracked everyone up with this parody of that post!
http://domainshane.com/serial-investor-domain-shane-offers-serial-investor-luc-biggs-his-domain/
James
Top Contributor
I think the thing is if you are of English heritage it is important because it is the potential king of England been born, so its more important to East West (or what ever Kim Kardashian called her kid)
Personally I think it was over played and way too much hype as people were camping out for weeks to get shots you could have just rocked up on the day for a few pictures hehe. I can't say I was excited but I can see the significance to some people.
Philip Littlewood
Top Contributor
I actually think Private Eye gave it all the attention it needed with their headline: "Woman has baby"
Not sure how they covered the Kardashian birth (if at all)
Not sure how they covered the Kardashian birth (if at all)
snoopy
Top Contributor
It is good for domainers in the same way that stories about dirty cab drivers are good for the taxi industry. But that is life, the domain industry is on the dodgy side. Probably most of us have a least one that that is a likely UDRP loss.
snoopy
Top Contributor
The average person on the street would see this as a straight up squat, the average journalist could easily write a piece about how this is squatting. The only people who think this is not squatting is domainers and their lawyers.
I think people should be able to do what they like, but most people will not see it that way, hence the bad press from stuff like this.
payattention
Archived Member
Righto Troy - good to know where you stand.
All I would say is insert these two words into Google:
auDA cybersquatting
What's with the consistent harping on about auDA when they have nothing to do with the .com extension?
findtim
Top Contributor
isn't it obvious? its just letting people know that the crap that goes on in .com is not accepted in the .com.au world
tim
