When people first hear about domain investing, even experienced marketers, they often cringe. Some think it means buying trademark and typo terms to get “accidental” visitors looking for a different site. Some believe domains have little monetary value, and are instead traded on intrinsic characteristics like “cuteness” or scarcity.
Some still believe a domain name doesn’t matter, thinking JiggyPop.org is just as good as Hotels.com, provided the site’s content is the same. Listen, at one time I thought those things too, but those assumptions are dead wrong. Let me illustrate the real value of quality domain investments with a little quiz: Which domain name is most valuable on a strict valuation basis? a) Google.com or b) CellPhones.com
If you said Google.com, which is the obvious answer, you would in fact be wrong, and here’s why… Ignore Google.com the “brand” for a moment, and think of “Google” as a keyword. Repeat after me, when you own the domain name, you own the keyword.
I have several domains like Google.com, all cute, super fun-to-say, and memorable, but with no real definition. None get more than a few visitors a month - accidental, random traffic, at best. And since “Google” doesn’t historically mean anything, there’s almost no way to monetize a name like that without millions and millions of dollars worth of branding, and years of reputation building. At best, a domain like Google.com - but with no existing name recognition - might earn a few dollars a year in click revenue and sell for a few thousand at auction.
Now try and just think what you could do with a domain name like Books.com and just how much casual traffic you would get. The is commonly known as type-in traffic or direct navigation. If I were to base this on established type-in click-through metrics for the domain industry plus my own personal experience, I would expect a domain name like Books.com would normally receive up to 5000 type-in visitors a day, which is an incredible 125,000 monthly hits. (All revealed in part 2)…coming soon.
Recent Comments