Hobart.com.au sold!

[snoopy]

Who knows, but its making more money then a parking page with the wrong image, do you agree?

You don't know how much it is making, I don't know how much it is making.

Your example is not one of successful site development. You said it has been making money for you years, if that is literally all you are claiming (ie that it makes something), then that is true of the park page page with the wrong image.

 

[DavidL]

You don't know how much it is making, I don't know how much it is making.

Your example is not one of successful site development. You said it has been making money for you years, if that is literally all you are claiming (ie that it makes something), then that is true of the park page page with the wrong image.

I expect it probably does OK. It's a 12+ year old PR6 and probably ranks pretty well for Sydney related terms of which there are plenty (13m local phrase)

It ranks no.1 above the official City of Sydney website which is very well backed and promoted for example for the term 'sydney' (which just itself has 74,000 searches)

Sure it's a long way off it's potential but I agree with James - it will be making a lot more than the parked Melbourne page.

 

[James]

I expect it probably does OK. It's a 12+ year old PR6 and probably ranks pretty well for Sydney related terms of which there are plenty (13m local phrase)

It ranks no.1 above the official City of Sydney website which is very well backed and promoted for example for the term 'sydney' (which just itself has 74,000 searches)

Sure it's a long way off it's potential but I agree with James - it will be making a lot more than the parked Melbourne page.

Thanks David, at least some one is making a rough guess its making some money by looking at the metrics behind the domain rather then making comments with out research, I agree the site needs design work yet I know its been around for years ranking strongly.

 

[snoopy]

Thanks David, at least some one is making a rough guess its making some money by looking at the metrics behind the domain rather then making comments with out research, I agree the site needs design work yet I know its been around for years ranking strongly.

I said I don't know what it is making, and you don't know what it is making either, despite your earlier claims.

I don't think this is a successful site, compare it to hobart.com.au and David's comments on that,

Just to let you know we sold Hobart.com.au for $65K today. Bittersweet as we had a decent little site on there that was ranking #1 for a while but same old story - too many projects, too little time so it needed a good home.

Ranking no.1 doesn't equal success if there is no real business model there, this is just a bit of adsense/affiliate fluff. Like I said, 9 likes, you can see how interested people really are in the offering.

 

[James]

I said I don't know what it is making, and you don't know what it is making either, despite your earlier claims.

I don't think this is a successful site, compare it to hobart.com.au and David's comments on that,

Ranking no.1 doesn't equal success if there is no real business model there, this is just a bit of adsense/affiliate fluff. Like I said, 9 likes, you can see how interested people really are in the offering.

I never had a guess on what it was making, I made the statement that it was making more then the landing page with the wrong image.

You can make an educated guess on what traffic it drives via some very quick research:

Example below:

Even if they are making a 2-5% conversion on $10 affiliate sale for example, combine that with a CPM banner and you do the maths. Compare that with the parking page with the wrong image and no index coverage, you do the maths on maybe a 5-10% CTR at a parking page rate (who knows).

So to back up my original statement, does the basic website make more then the parking page we can make and educated guess been: Yes.

 

[Chris.C]

Hey James, where did you get that data report from?

 

[snoopy]

Even if they are making a 2-5% conversion on $10 affiliate sale for example, combine that with a CPM banner and you do the maths. Compare that with the parking page with the wrong image and no index coverage, you do the maths on maybe a 5-10% CTR at a parking page rate (who knows).

So to back up my original statement, does the basic website make more then the parking page we can make and educated guess been: Yes.

To take a quote from this post above "who knows"...not you, not me.

Do I believe Melbourne.com's park page has a CTR of 5%-10%, No.
Do I think you are making an informed guess. No.
Have you actually estimated estimated Sydney.com.au's revenue, No. (you'd like me to "do the maths")
Have I done the maths...no, Like I said I don't know its revenue and I don't think you have any idea either.

All I see is a site that doesn't look to be doing well, it has traffic and no business model, no obvious level of engagement from visitors. Some affiliate links and adsense...its junk.

So "back to your original statement",

for example they have been making money off this domain for years, imo far out weights a dodgy parking page with the wrong city image.

I don't think it far outweighs it, I think it is an example of unsuccessful development, it is as good as Hobart.com.au's success was, that doesn't mean the development adds any real value.

 

[James]

This argument is going no where, I stand 100% by my original comment:

"they have been making money off this domain for years, imo far out weights a dodgy parking page with the wrong city image."

- Metrics above only match it up, if you work in Affiliate marketing you can make your own conclusions to an estimation on revenue.

- Do I think they could tune it up even more on site design ect = 100% yes.

- Does this raise a good question: Not so good parking pages on high priced domains vs. micro site design and affiliate marketing = yes.

I have no more comments to make.

 

[StuartB]

Well done David. Can't wait to see where they take it.

 

[DavidL]

Snoopy, sometimes it pays to just back down and admit you are wrong.

James simply stated that he believes the sydney.com.au website makes more than the melbourne.com parked page.

I also believe this to be the case. Everybody reading this also believes this is the case.

That ranking report above further supports this theory.

Not sure why to see intent on disputing this suggestion? I know you are a parking advocate and a development skeptic but really, you know that James is right. It has a heap more traffic than and makes more than Melbourne.com. Don't just argue for the sake of it.

 

[snoopy]

This argument is going no where, I stand 100% by my original comment:

"they have been making money off this domain for years, imo far out weights a dodgy parking page with the wrong city image."

- Metrics above only match it up, if you work in Affiliate marketing you can make your own conclusions to an estimation on revenue.

How about making an estimate if you think the current site far outweighs a parking page, what do you think it is making & what do you think it would make parked.

So what we've heard is everything but an answer to that question. I can see your estimates on the CTR it might make parked are totally unrealistic so my gut feeling is you don't really know what it would make. Happily I don't know either. But it is you making the statement, so let's hear what you think.

Note: I'm not arguing the owner should park it, I'm saying the development is terrible, they may have a no.1 ranking but what is the point in that if the monetization method is random adsense ads for groupon, slow mac and cheesey dating sites.

Do I think they could tune it up even more on site design ect = 100% yes.

Tune it up "even more"? How about scrapping it and starting again.

 

[snoopy]

James simply stated that he believes the sydney.com.au website makes more than the melbourne.com parked page.

That was what is got watered down to a few posts later (where the "far outweighs" stuff gets dropped), here is what he said initially

take Sydney.com.au for example they have been making money off this domain for years, imo far out weights a dodgy parking page with the wrong city image.

...as though this is a site making significant revenue.

Is there anyone willing to estimate what they think this site is making?

 

[DavidL]

Sure I'll have a go:

I reckon Melbourne.com gets about 500 visits a month with a CTR of 20% and CPC of 30c = $30/month.

I reckon Sydney.com.au gets about 100,000 visits a month equating to 150,000 impressions with a CTR of about 5% and CPC of 50c = $3,750/month plus unknown affiliate income & direct ad sales.

 

[snoopy]

Sure I'll have a go:

I reckon Melbourne.com gets about 500 visits a month with a CTR of 20% and CPC of 30c = $30/month.

Thanks you for coming back with some actual estimates.

This name had an overture score with keyword around 200 quite a while ago, personally would guess around 40-50 uniques per day. The CTR I would say is significant higher than what you are saying.

Here is 12 months of stats for a geo name I own,

clevelandohio.com 2444 visitors 1740 clicks

So that is a CTR of 71% which I think is pretty typical for a not overly well targeted generic name like that. CPC I think your guess is likely accurate.

So stats like that I'd say about $300 / month.

I reckon Sydney.com.au gets about 100,000 visits a month equating to 150,000 impressions with a CTR of about 5% and CPC of 50c = $3,750/month plus

Why would a click on a park page for melbourne.com be worth 30 cents versus a click via adsense for sydney.com.au being worth 50 cents? I would say something is wrong with those stats. The ads really look like filler ads, nothing to do with Sydney so I doubt the CTR of 5%. The impressions I'm not sure about either based on the actual search volumes for sydney related terms posted above, I wouldn't say the impression count is impossible but I really have doubts.

unknown affiliate income & direct ad sales.

Can't see any direct ad sales on the site myself.

 

[DavidL]

Thanks you for coming back with some actual estimates.

This name had an overture score with keyword around 200 quite a while ago, personally would guess around 40-50 uniques per day. The CTR I would say is significant higher than what you are saying.

Here is 12 months of stats for a geo name I own,

clevelandohio.com 2444 visitors 1740 clicks

So that is a CTR of 71% which I think is pretty typical for a not overly well targeted generic name like that. CPC I think your guess is likely accurate.

Wow - I don't think any of my 1500+ parked domains have a CTR anything like that. Mine tend to languish in the sub 20% I think. WTF am i doing wrong? Or do you find geo's have a particularly high CTR (which is at odds with the geo-monetisation dilemma we've discussed and agreed before)

I hope you didn't cherrypick an anomaly did you?

Why would a click on a park page for melbourne.com be worth 30 cents versus a click via adsense for sydney.com.au being worth 50 cents?

Adsense CPCs in my experience seem to be a bit higher than parking CPCs broadly speaking. I guess because the parking company takes a cut? Also (but this probably isn't a big deal) am I right in thinking Adwords advertisers can opt out of ads on parked domains but remain in content network? This would also drive down CPC.

The ads really look like filler ads, nothing to do with Sydney so I doubt the CTR of 5%.

Remember everybody will see different ads depending on browser history. I guess you've been stuffing around on Groupon too much!

5% CTR on a page like that is conservative too - sure many Adsensers reading will agree with me.

The impressions I'm not sure about either based on the actual search volumes for sydney related terms posted above, I wouldn't say the impression count is impossible but I really have doubts.

Remember there's a huge, huge longtail of search terms with Sydney in it. 13,000,000 local searches to be precise. It only needs to be there or thereabouta for a tiny portion of those searches to hit that figure.

Also Alexa seems to back it up (FWIW). I have a site with 150,000 UVs which has an AU alexa rank of 10,000. Sydney.com.au is ranked 12,000. On that basis 100,000 uvs is conservative.

 

[Lorenzo]

What group of investors?

People always say they would have paid more when the don't have the money, there is some irony in that.




Would say around $200k. It is a another trophy name rather than something with a clear business model. There has never been a reported .com.au sale anywhere near $2million. Even for .com there is barely a market at that level.

well if you think I am ironic then fine...have a laugh.

You are missing the point about being a city name, not just:

theamazingsuburbnexttothebeach.com.au

 

[snoopy]

well if you think I am ironic then fine...have a laugh.

You are missing the point about being a city name, not just:

theamazingsuburbnexttothebeach.com.au

Yes, I thought it was a reg fee name that someone picked up yesterday, how silly of me. You've presented a compelling argument.

 

[smee]

Sure I'll have a go:

I reckon Melbourne.com gets about 500 visits a month with a CTR of 20% and CPC of 30c = $30/month.

I reckon Sydney.com.au gets about 100,000 visits a month equating to 150,000 impressions with a CTR of about 5% and CPC of 50c = $3,750/month plus unknown affiliate income & direct ad sales.

Maybe the website is for this Melbourne
http://www.melbourneflorida.org/

 

[snoopy]

Wow - I don't think any of my 1500+ parked domains have a CTR anything like that. Mine tend to languish in the sub 20% I think. WTF am i doing wrong? Or do you find geo's have a particularly high CTR (which is at odds with the geo-monetisation dilemma we've discussed and agreed before)

Geo's have lower CTR's compared to say product names or the like (especially non tourist names). If you have say a portfolio of names that combined produces 20% ctr, I would say those names aren't really natural type in names. A lot of it is likely bot traffic, or names with very low traffic counts where the people visiting are coming for a reason others than because they just thought they'd type in the web address.

I hope you didn't cherrypick an anomaly did you?

I just picked the first geo I could think of that wasn't a tourist name.

Adsense CPCs in my experience seem to be a bit higher than parking CPCs broadly speaking. I guess because the parking company takes a cut? Also (but this probably isn't a big deal) am I right in thinking Adwords advertisers can opt out of ads on parked domains but remain in content network? This would also drive down CPC.

Never really heard anything like that. Parking company margins are often slim. I think the owner of melbourne.com would be getting a much larger cut than the owner of sydney.com.au.

Remember everybody will see different ads depending on browser history. I guess you've been stuffing around on Groupon too much!

I don't think I have ever even visited their site. What ads are you seeing (hope it isn't latex body suits!)

5% CTR on a page like that is conservative too - sure many Adsensers reading will agree with me.

For untargeted ads like that I really doubt it.

I guess the thing is this, your "rose coloured glasses" estimate is under $4000/mo.

If we start talking about half that, 1/4 of that....less (eg if CTR and CPC is out) we are talking terrible returns compared to just selling it in my view. I don't know what is involved in running this site (hopefully not much) but that doesn't sound like a good business to me. It is an impressive name, and ranks well on a big keyword and still makes not much. There is just no substance in the site, no business model, it sounds to me like almost the exact situation of what you have described with hobart.com.au.

 

[jhellyer]

Lol

Snoop, do you ever get sick of being a know all f***wit?