ccTLD's where the smart money is...

[Billy01]

Wot I mean

Sorry Don should have been more explaining. What I meant by values and deals I'm talking about the models in the UK that are from a start up VC process to tapping into huge traffic suppliers etc.

I'm not going to give any specifics but a lot of us on here are not here to buy and sell domains.

The media companies in Australia are the main players. Fairfax is all over it. Murdoch NO comment, remember when he didn't invest and the bubble and lost millions in late 90's to even now Career One lost 3.5 million after doing a deal with Monster and they still need more capital as Seek runs away with the market.

And suprise suprise Myspace is being relaunched another dud attempt by Murdoch to say I didn't really pay 3 billion and lose it all to Facebook.

The Murdoch list goes on and on and on...................................

The deals by the little guys are still to come.

Ten times earnings in the UK yes on net profit is about right for the online world. As for domain vals I'm not sure.

As Djuqa says the .com.au extension in undervalued as I've never met a man I agree with more.

But now its time to see the models flourish, some will fail and others will be left to pick up the pieces.

We're entering a very new and never seen phase in the next year or so.

 

[DavidL]

. Speaking of everyone - if there are only about 3-400 active domainers in Australia as per a number suggested earlier in this thread then EVERY one of them has viewed aud.com.au at netfleet - or a few are going back often, lol - 386 views as we speak. I could probably figure it out if I bothered to read all the info but I am bewildered as to how the quality ranking works - obviously numerals earn negative demerit points (cannot be negative demerit otherwise it would be merit).

Hi shags... not going to push the point about my feeling on .au any more. I'm a firm believer in the growth of this market - it's done well by me so far!

Just wrt to your technical query above.

aud.com.au is a spotlight listing so it receives much more exposure than some other domains. The owner has also cleverly put a redirect on the domain - www.aud.com.au goes stright to the listing too. All these views have helped his quality score too leading to higher ranking in searches.

Also, the vast majority of visitors on Netfleet are not domainers (95%) but 'end-users' finding us through the search engines or via our partner registrars (we have nearly 7,000 signed up members)

Lastly the quality score of a domain listing on Netfleet is not a reflection of the quality of the domain - rather tha quality of the listing. Low starting prices, lots of views, realtstic target prices will all help this score. http://www.netfleet.com.au/index.php?a=faqs#11 should help!

 

[snoopy]

As for basins.com.au, it was advertised for just a few hours and sold into what I freely admit is quite a small but emerging domainer's market. 'Wholesale' if you like rather than 'retail'. Sell it in a structured 7-day auction and you'd get double I'd suggest. Contact end users and you're looking 4-figs plus.

The fact is it sold at a venue that most .com.au players watch each day, and it is a typical sales for a name like that. It is saying nothing at all to suggest it could have sold for more via another method. The stuff about endusers is meaningless as well. If it was easy to get a higher price as you'd like to suggest you'd probably have bought it yourself, or someone would have bidded higher.

Also basins.com.au, I would bet was available to register 5 years ago. I remember in 2005, those were the sorts of names that were about.

Personally I have doubts about the above, it is a pretty strong term.

So if you regged it back then, paid your reg fees ($80), earnt a bit through parking (say $25), it's cost you $55. Then you sell it for $331 (daily auction) or $600 (7-day auction) or $1,000 (end-user auction). Even at the worst case scenario your retun over those 5 years is 600%

I don't remember reg fees being that cheap back then, and not sure about the parking revenue either. And lets stop talking about higher sales prices when it sold for $331. It is drawing cheques on an empty bank account. It could just as easily have sold for less at another venue.

If it wasn't a drop though you'd have ownership transfer fees to pay as well plus you'd be doing paperwork for AUDA. Now I'm not sure when this name was previously registered but 5-10 years reg fees (+any business registration fees if it is fairly old), plus fees and paperwork to sell it for $331, that doesn't sound very profitable to me. $55 is your best case scenario, worst case scenario is more like $500-$600, ie 10 years of registration (the early years being at significantly higher costs than today) (couple of hundred dollars), 10 years of business registration fees (around $300)+ $50 to transfer the name....and that is for registering an obviously very good term.

2001 - 2010 .au showed a great ROI (as evidenced by your own hand-reg domains that are now worth $10K)

They aren't worth 10k, that is an asking price, you offered me $600 didn't you? I'm pretty sure it will never sell for 10k because there is not much of a market for .com.au's above 4 figures. I'm better off holding it because the kind of offers it gets is a couple of years PPC revenue. I think the name was about 5-6 years old, $600 is probably 4 times reg fees spent. That is a lot better than most of the .com.au I regged in terms of comparing offers to what has been spent.

 

[Billy01]

Woo Hoo newspaper sites will have to stop auto refresh

A classic example of what the UK had in 2000.

We're only 10 years behind

A standard measure for internet traffic to boost ad market
THE internet industry is moving towards a standard measure for internet traffic.
THE online media market is set to finally settle on a standardised measure for internet traffic in a big shake-up of the industry.

The move comes as online advertising in Australia is on the cusp of breaking the $2 billion mark.

An announcement is expected in the next three weeks and a tender has been called for research companies to provide a single standardised currency for measuring internet traffic.

In traditional media such as television, radio, outdoor and print, contracts worth millions of dollars are awarded to the company selected to supply the ratings, readership and audience data on which advertisers base their media buying decisions.

Until now, there have been several sets of competing audience numbers in online media, produced by companies including Nielsen, ComScore, Experian Hitwise, Omniture and Google Analytics, among others.


Finally, after years of pressure from advertisers and media buyers complaining about the lack of transparency, accountability and ability to compare publishers' audiences that this situation has created, digital publishers are cleaning up their act

According to a source close to the Interactive Advertising Bureau, whose board includes every major digital publisher except Google, the decision to appoint a preferred audience measurement company is being billed as the most critical in the five-year existence of the IAB.

It represents a shift for the organisation, which has for several years favoured the appointment of a number of "accredited" audience measurement suppliers, any number of which could receive the IAB's tick of approval if their research methodology was approved by the IAB's auditor.

Media Federation of Australia chairman Gary Hardwick said advertisers and media buyers had pushed for a single set of figures the industry could adopt as standard. "Ultimately we would like to get to one approved or preferred supplier and have that as the currency we'd like to be used," Mr Hardwick said. "We want greater frequency of the data and insight into the way people read and spend time on the internet."

The Australian Association of National Advertisers confirmed it had been consulted about the process. "I'm not in a position to comment on the tender proposal, but I'm aware of it having been floated," AANA chief executive Scott McClellan said.

"What we have been seeing in the digital space is a proliferation of metrics and it's starting to become a real problem for advertisers to understand the value they're getting for their media spend online.

"Any move to bring greater clarity to the picture is going to be welcomed by advertisers."

At least three suppliers are expected to participate in an initial request for information or request for tender process, including the dominant Australian audience measurement player Nielsen Online, US-based ComScore, and Indian company Komli Media, which is about to launch its ViziSense audience measurement product in Australia.

Komli Media co-founder and vice-president of international development Akshay Garg, who will be based in Sydney as the company launches a number of services in Australia in the next year, said he had been informed about the tender. "Definitely: we're cognisant of it," Mr Garg said. "We're just trying to formulate a strategy around it."

The IAB is expected to endorse a so-called hybrid system that combines data from a representative panel of internet users with site-centric data collected from cookies, or code, placed on publishers' websites.

Nielsen Online was the first supplier to have its NetView user panel audited by the IAB, which made 16 recommendations in order for it to be accredited.

After some delay, Nielsen is expected to resend its preliminary hybrid data to the IAB in the next month or so.

Nielsen Online managing director Matt Bruce, who is overseas, could not be reached late last week for comment.

ComScore and ViziSense are both understood to have a hybrid product.

Media understands the IAB, which was constituted in 2005 as an industry body representing digital publishers, will become an independent, incorporated body, removing legal obstacles to the appointment of a preferred supplier.

"We would have had a concern about the IAB appointing a preferred supplier in terms of the risk to which it would expose us regarding restraint of trade," a publisher source said. "Other bodies have been individually incorporated and they have done it."

IAB chief executive Paul Fisher would not comment on the tender process on Friday. He refused to say if the IAB was planning to subsidise or co-fund its preferred audience measurement service, or if it would be funded by the media buyers and advertisers who used the system adopted as the standard.

"It's no secret that the MFA and the IAB have been working towards a standardised online audience measurement system in this market," Mr Fisher said.

"It's no secret that the IAB is incorporating at the present time."

Media reported two years ago that publishers were under pressure to spend up to $10 million to fund a new ratings system that would allow advertisers to compare online audiences with those for TV, radio and other media.

 

[snoopy]

I really hate to come between you two ....... however .......... question, are either of you relying on the income from domaining as your sole source of income?

Yes.

Speaking of everyone - if there are only about 3-400 active domainers in Australia as per a number suggested earlier in this thread then EVERY one of them has viewed aud.com.au at netfleet - or a few are going back often, lol - 386 views as we speak. I could probably figure it out if I bothered to read all the info but I am bewildered as to how the quality ranking works - obviously numerals earn negative demerit points (cannot be negative demerit otherwise it would be merit).

Not really sure what the numbers are. Depends what you mean by active also I would think. Also a reasonable chunk wouldn't be very involved with .com.au (maybe half?).

How does the subject of accounting and enormous %age profits gain a mention on the same page as domaining (by the way, the %age profits previously mentioned are not profits but moreover a markup factor - profit is different ) Where do these rather timid creatures with deep pockets have their habitat.

The is true, when it comes to enduser sales the usual course of events is to wait and maybe selling 1% of inventory a year at very high prices, whilst the 99% is held onto - that is if you domains are good quality. (that kind of statistic has been calculated before with people like buydomains, I've seen others talk about 1-2% as well. The other alternative is to actively market to endusers, in which case the high price is a factor of your labor (though it will likely yield lower prices than just waiting). It is more in between selling everything to resellers and waiting for endusers.

It is painfully obvious that selling a .com.au domain for any semblance of the term profitable gain is about the same as finding a gold nugget whilst holidaying in Ballarat - same odds.

I wouldn't go that far, I would say though it has been a far harder market than many others, because of higher costs/restrictions/transaction costs/smaller illiquid market etc.

So, when do you think the .au bubble will burst?

I don't see any bubble myself. If there was a bubble names would sell easily for high prices.

 

[DavidL]

Snoopy, let's simplify it.

2002-2005. This is your area of expertise so correct me if I'm wrong.

A good time to invest in .au. A great time to invest in .com. Both investments delivered great ROI such as your hand-regged .au names that are now worth $10K. I can only guess what sort of returns you managed from .com but bloody well done. I sure wish I'd had the foresight back then

I hope we both agree on this snapshot in time (2002-2005)

2006-2010. Perhaps this is where we differ in opinions

I believe it was a great time to invest in ccTLDs especially .au. The sales figures seem to back this up:

http://www.dnjournal.com/newsletters/2010/january.htm

Total Reported Domain Sales Dropped 12.5% in 2009 But ccTLD Sales Soared 28% Over the Previous Year

Median of the top 100 reported sales to DNJ.

Year.......Com Sales .... ccTLD Sales

2006.......$125K........ $13K
2007.......$200K ....... $21K
2008.......$188K ....... $26K
2009.......$141K ....... $37K

Now I also believe that it was a lousy time to invest in .com. The sales figures speak for themselves:

http://sedo.com/fileadmin/documents/pressdownload/2009_Market_Study.pdf

2007 the average .com sale on Sedo was $5,016
2008 the average .com sale on Sedo was $2,512
2009 the average .com sale on Sedo was $1,829


Snoopy, can I ask whether you have invested much new money into domains since 2006? I sure have and have seen a great return (apart from a few .com's which lost me money). I only ask because if you weren't actually seeking out new investment during this period, then it helps me understand some of the conflicting statements....

Again, I concede to your expertise for 2002-2005 and congratulate you on your excellent investments.

 

[snoopy]

Snoopy, let's simplify it.

2002-2005. This is your area of expertise so correct me if I'm wrong.

A good time to invest in .au. A great time to invest in .com. Both investments delivered great ROI such as your hand-regged .au names that are now worth $10K. I can only guess what sort of returns you managed from .com but bloody well done. I sure wish I'd had the foresight back then

I hope we both agree on this snapshot in time (2002-2005)

2006-2010. Perhaps this is where we differ in opinions

I believe it was a great time to invest in ccTLDs especially .au. The sales figures seem to back this up:

http://www.dnjournal.com/newsletters/2010/january.htm

We are back where we started from, lumping 200 tlds together (cctlds) and making statements about .com.au based on that data, then going further to imply profitability from those figures.

Wouldn't it be better to provide examples of people actually making money from .com.au rather than a whole lot of cctld growth figures?

Median of the top 100 reported sales to DNJ.

Year.......Com Sales .... ccTLD Sales

2006.......$125K........ $13K
2007.......$200K ....... $21K
2008.......$188K ....... $26K
2009.......$141K ....... $37K

Which looks the better market to you? Again though it is comparing 200 extensions combined with .com.

2007 the average .com sale on Sedo was $5,016
2008 the average .com sale on Sedo was $2,512
2009 the average .com sale on Sedo was $1,829

We've been through this before, Sedo changed their commission structure a few years ago which encouraged a lot of low priced sales. The same trend has happened with country codes. It was changed so a $60 sale now had a $6 commission if the names was parked with them rather than a $50 commission, that is reason for that average decline, alot of low priced sales/auctions because 2 figure sales became viable. They have since changed their policy back to how it was.

I question why you keep brining up data that you know is bad and you know applies equally to cctlds?

This is data I presented last time you made this claim,

Here is the same data for popular country codes, as presented in that Sedo report,

(averages)

.co.uk (63% loss)

2007 $6775
2008 $3256
2009 $2489

.de (8% loss)

2007 $1493
2008 $1719
2009 $1383

.es (64% loss)

2007 $4626
2008 $2548
2009 $1666

If you look at all the other extensions they have in those tables (11 in total), the only ones to rise between 2007-2009 is .biz and .fr.

Snoopy, can I ask whether you have invested much new money into domains since 2006? I sure have and have seen a great return (apart from a few .com's which lost me money). I only ask because if you weren't actually seeking out new investment during this period, then it helps me understand some of the conflicting statements....

Again, I concede to your expertise for 2002-2005 and congratulate you on your excellent investments.

A few reasons,

-The parking yield on domains is low, it is as low as the highest point during the boom in my view. ie prices have fallen much inline with parking revenue, but I don't see any sign of growth that could really justify buying at current multiples. I think at this point it is probably wise to factor in further declines in parking revenue but multiples don't reflect that.

-Other areas provide comparable or better yields than domains a lot of the time, eg shares. There is a huge difference between something ultra liquid and a domain as a passive investment.

-The dynamics of the market has changed completely, there is nothing really pushing the market. Lots of people talking about development but that isn't something that can be scaled. It isn't a domainer strategy.

-In say 2002 the market was in a very good position in my view. Domains could be bought for cashflow. People weren't very focused on price growth, the market had fallen so heavily that not many really thought there would be another boom. Today people are just buying to speculate in my view. Might as well buy a lottery ticket.

-Things change over time, a market isn't always good or always bad. Personally I don't think this is a good market, I don't see positive trends. That may well change, just like it has changed in the past.

-I personally don't see it with .com.au either, if you tell me you think prices will rise, that is just a guess, lots of .com people think prices will rise, it is no business model. At the moment I think .com.au is a very difficult market to make money speculating in. Obviously sales totals have risen, but that doesn't mean a lot of money is being made.

 

[DavidL]

We are back where we started from, lumping 200 tlds together (cctlds) and making statements about .com.au based on that data, then going further to imply profitability from those figures.

Wouldn't it be better to provide examples of people actually making money from .com.au rather than a whole lot of cctld growth figures?

Well thats obviously a difficult thing to do. People don't necessarily like opening up their financial position for scrutiny.

I for one can say that starting with a few thousand in 2005, am now earning a fulltime income off my domain investments (note: not including Netfleet)

I bet out of the 10's of 1,000's of com investors who've tried the same (since 2005/2006) there wouldn't be many....

Which looks the better market to you? Again though it is comparing 200 extensions combined with .com.

Oh snoopy - I thought we've covered that one. A large marketplace does not necessarily infer a good marketplace.

You're suggesting that because the value of .com's traded in the last few years is greater than the value of ccTLDs, it makes com investment 'better'.

Remember return on an investment is measured by the relative change in asset value - not the actual value itself.

We've been through this before, Sedo changed their commission structure a few years ago which encouraged a lot of low priced sales. The same trend has happened with country codes. It was changed so a $60 sale now had a $6 commission if the names was parked with them rather than a $50 commission, that is reason for that average decline, alot of low priced sales/auctions because 2 figure sales became viable. They have since changed their policy back to how it was.

Oh sorry - I guess I wasn't quite clear on that. The figures looked like a trend to me, not a once off blip you see. So it's now changed back to a min $50 commission or something has it?

A few reasons,

-The parking yield on domains is low, it is as low as the highest point during the boom in my view. ie prices have fallen much inline with parking revenue, but I don't see any sign of growth that could really justify buying at current multiples. I think at this point it is probably wise to factor in further declines in parking revenue but multiples don't reflect that.

-Other areas provide comparable or better yields than domains a lot of the time, eg shares. There is a huge difference between something ultra liquid and a domain as a passive investment.

-The dynamics of the market has changed completely, there is nothing really pushing the market. Lots of people talking about development but that isn't something that can be scaled. It isn't a domainer strategy.

-In say 2002 the market was in a very good position in my view. Domains could be bought for cashflow. People weren't very focused on price growth, the market had fallen so heavily that not many really thought there would be another boom. Today people are just buying to speculate in my view. Might as well buy a lottery ticket.

-Things change over time, a market isn't always good or always bad. Personally I don't think this is a good market, I don't see positive trends. That may well change, just like it has changed in the past.

-I personally don't see it with .com.au either, if you tell me you think prices will rise, that is just a guess, lots of .com people think prices will rise, it is no business model. At the moment I think .com.au is a very difficult market to make money speculating in. Obviously sales totals have risen, but that doesn't mean a lot of money is being made.

Ok you didn't answer the very direct question. I suspect this means you haven't actually invested any new money into domains in the last few years?

As such, I guess you've not spent the thousands of hours of analysis and research of the market (especially .au where you have never been a fan) that is needed for sensible investment (on a large scale).

Again, I don't question your obvious intelligence nor your foresight and expertise with your earlier investments, but I suspect with respect to .au in the last few years, there might be others who could make a better estimation as to the state of the market.

In fact 90% of the members here have probably done more research on .au than you?

 

[snoopy]

Well thats obviously a difficult thing to do. People don't necessarily like opening up their financial position for scrutiny.

I for one can say that starting with a few thousand in 2005, am now earning a fulltime income off my domain investments (note: not including Netfleet)

That is obviously a good outcome.

I bet out of the 10's of 1,000's of com investors who've tried the same (since 2005/2006) there wouldn't be many....

It is just a blanket statement that doesn't mean much. 95%+ of domain speculators don't make it no matter what extension they invest in.

Oh snoopy - I thought we've covered that one. A large marketplace does not necessarily infer a good marketplace.

You're suggesting that because the value of .com's traded in the last few years is greater than the value of ccTLDs, it makes com investment 'better'.

I'm saying there is a liquid market for .com's. That isn't the case for most cctlds. You are coming to conclusions that has very little to with the data you are starting with, ie suggesting .com.au is a good place to invest because the average top 100 cctlds sale has risen.

Remember return on an investment is measured by the relative change in asset value - not the actual value itself.

None of the data you have presented has anything to do with .com.au profitability, other than stating you yourself have made money from it. There is no point taking data on other cctlds, or taking about averages top 100 sales or fudging up stats on .com based on bias, it is all meaningless.

Oh sorry - I guess I wasn't quite clear on that. The figures looked like a trend to me, not a once off blip you see. So it's now changed back to a min $50 commission or something has it?

The trend is downward for all cctlds measured except .fr as well. It is meaningless data as the trend is based on a Sedo policy change.

Ok you didn't answer the very direct question. I suspect this means you haven't actually invested any new money into domains in the last few years?

Sorry I misread the question, I thought you asked me why I hasn't been investing. I haven't bought a domain in 2.5 years, I've been a net seller over that time because I did not see good prospects in the market.

As such, I guess you've not spent the thousands of hours of analysis and research of the market (especially .au where you have never been a fan) that is needed for sensible investment (on a large scale).

"Not buying" does not mean someone is not looking at things. *If* I thought there was good opportunities in .com or .com.au I'd be buying.

In fact 90% of the members here have probably done more research on .au than you?

No idea, it is just any figure that is made up and meaningless.

 

[Data Glasses]

...australian domains

= developers dream

= domainers nightmare

 

[Chumby]

Agree

Yea... I had many LLL.com's I purchased and sold in a short period of time for mega gains ... aae.com, pla.com, gwe.com etc. I was also given iHQ.com for nothing...and then sold on again quickly for $$$$. Jennifer.com was offered to me for $5K only. Imagine what that is worth now.... Followed safesys and snoopy for a long time...

I had the second highest bid on marketing.com.au but let it slide for $5k ... man was thinking of doing what OMG are doing now... just didnt follow through. Ouch. Surely those days are gone...

Aus domains are surely long term investments... when the aftermarket matures more they may be worth something ... but I am really thinking that people who pay mega prices on the auctions need to wait a long time or develop or else there investment is shacky.... the only people that are desparate to purchase seem to be those whose domains dropped and they are trying to get them back

My thoughts anyway...

Cheers
Chumby

 

[djuqa]

...australian domains

= developers dream

= domainers nightmare

exactly

So lets start developing them
Websites are often easier to Promote names
auDA rules state "use or lose em"
easier to SEO a website than a park page
auDA says "ownership" solely for resale is "Not on"

 

[snoopy]

Some stats from dnjournal today for the last quarter, I was actually quite surprised that cctlds was only 17% of the total.

I find these numbers hard to explain really because I think the industry generally is still in a very weak state.

.Com sales, boosted by those four seven-figure blockbusters, totaled $21.7 million - 74% of total sales. ccTLD sales totaled $5.1 million (17% of total sales), down slightly from the $5.49 million in ccTLD sales reported in 1Q-2010. However, the median sales price for country code domains that went for $2,000 or more enjoyed a solid 6.5% increase, rising from $3,491 in 1Q-2010 to $3,718 in 2Q-2010. That is almost as high as the median .com sales price in 2Q-2010 which was $3,800. (Note: We track .com sales starting at $2,000 and all other extensions starting at $1,000. To get an apples to apples comparison of ccTLD median prices to .com medians, we used $2,000 and up sales for each category).

While the ccTLDs have surged over the past couple of years, non .com gTLDs have not been so fortunate. Reported sales in that category totaled just $2.3 million in 2Q-2010, down 26% from the $3.12 million registered in 1Q-2010 (and less than half of the sales total for country code domains in 2Q-2010). The 2Q-2010 median price for non .com gTD sales ($2,000 and up) was $3,088 - over $600 less than the ccTLD median more than $700 less than the .com median.

http://www.dnjournal.com/newsletters/2010/may-july.htm