There is logic out of the names that are sold (well most), hence how current market dictates that certain aged domains with relevance do have a better chance of reaching the top of the search engines (ie: hotels.com at the top when "hotels" is put into google or cheapfares.com for keywords "cheap fares".)
I used to think so too, but with the literally thousands of SEO specialists out there combating one another to maintain top ranks in the search engines, it's really a matter of money, not an automatic top search ranking simply do to the domain.
Hotels.com happens to be the top position, not due to its name but to the countless $1000s of dollars in marketing, advertising and development that has taken place. Cameras.com for an alternative example, is nowhere to be seen for MORE the first 10 pages... and that's as far as I bothered to look.
If an advertiser BRANDS his business and the domain reflects that brand... it could be a completely UN-intuitive name... let's pick one at Random... "GOOGLE".... yet drive traffic like crazy.
Retailers KNOW this and that's why, for the most part and with few exceptions, the only people really paying ridiculous sums of cash for the past 15 years have been Domainers.
Given the 100 years of Marketing 101, Business has learned to first BRAND and then Direct, not the other way around... so domains are a hard concept for most of them to get their heads around. Add to that the fact that domain holders, often viewed as virtual land squatters and extortionists, are asking such rediculous sums for these domains, most companies have simply just decided to do their own thing and leave the penny sales to the parkers and become more creative with their branding campaign.
Which is what lead me to point
#1.
I can assure you having generic .com's will be popular for search engines to have on the top for many years to come because this is what the end user understands as the most relevant website for their search.
I actually disagree with you to some degree... looking at the trends, Internet users are becoming smarter and with Google, Yahoo, MSN and more user friendly engines like "Ask" teaching their users to use MORE terms to get BETTER results... We can see multiple key-word searched getting better results and getting them FASTER.
The increasing trend in todays market is to step away from "direct navigation", to use search engines more and to use " and & to refine searches and in an ever increasing number of cases, to type in entire phrases, such as "how to change an oil filter".
It is reflected in the CPC values, Click Fraud, Click bids and so many other factors... namely the recent rush to consolidation by so many top domain companies and individuals. The in direct navigation is lies in BULK, because the frequency is so much lower. Parking companies are paying less and advertisers such as Google and Yahoo are paying more because they are "qualifying" their clicks by ranking the quality of traffic by site.
The short end of all of this is that businesses are tight and need to find more cost effective ways to reach to an ever increasingly efficient internet market. And that, I'm sorry to say, doesn't bode well for simple parkers any more.
but lucky for the generic .com holder it's inevitable that many end users will wisen up to the game and make offers holders can't refuse. As more and more generics become pertinent websites the more generic holders will find traffic assuming the same.
The problem is that holders want the moon and 'most' businesses aren't willing to pay what "wholesalers" are paying or think a domain is worth. Which is why I completely believe, like you, that development is the only way this industry inevitably moves forward along with some BALANCE. Otherwise, business will simply keep creating their own solution to domains that are simply out of reach.
What percent of search engine traffic actually converts as opposed to parked traffic depending on the name?
That's a GREAT question and I think it deserved ANOTHER question... How do you define "converts". As a Parker, you probably define it as clicking through and getting your .04 cents for that click. As a Business, it means a "SALE".
So how many Parking clicks convert to a SALE? That's the REAL question and I think that is the most important question. Simply put, PPC is failing because advertisers are tired of paying for browsers, afraid of click fraud and the lack of transparency in the PPC world.
How much do you get per click versus what Google actually CHARGES that customer? Do you even KNOW? Why is it that on a keyword domain that gets $4.00 per click from the customer only pay .09 cents to the parker? And do visitors really CARE that the advertiser is paying for that click when they are just checking out something kinda interesting?
Versus...
I took the time to go to Google, type in exactly what I am looking for (indicating my level of interest), chose the website result that best encompasses my targeted item and then visited the site.... ALL FOR FREE.
As a business owner self, I'd rather NOT pay per click. And I think that's true for most. Bids are low because competition is low.
Also, DigitalCamera.com will receive much less traffic than Cameras.com, "Cameras" will be typed into the search engines much more than "Digital Cameras". (Cameras.com sold for 1.5M btw).
You are absoultely correct... It will get LESS traffic then Cameras, but MUCH MORE QUALIFIED TRAFFIC. And that's really the point. What good is it for me to bring in conventional camera customers, or camera repair customers, or movie camera customers or polaroid customers when I only sell Digital Cameras?
TARGETED TRAFFIC is what ever good little marketing director is taught in college. The BROADER the spread, the LESS the value, the LESS the cost. The smaller and more targeted the audience, the MORE value it has and the MORE the advertiser is willing to pay.
That's how ads on TV works, Magazines work, events work. Why shouldn't domains work the same way? Why, in fact, are domains the complete OPPOSITE? Because the parking market was created by people who were parking.
I know there are example of big companies that have jumped on the domain bandwagon but in perspective... not alot. Your example, Fund.com, was not Schwab or Hutton or some other established Wallstreet firm that picked up the domain to futher or market their business. It's a new technology applied to the old system. Geeks built it, not wallstreet leatherheads. Same with Hotels and many, many other domains.
The Brick and Motor players in those markets have been and will continue to brand and market themselves in catch phrases, multiple keywords and their own corporate domains.
Finding a way to meet these people with more qualified traffic, better search results and a cost structure that is more easily absorbed will result in an exponential growth of domain sales and a stronger, more robust internet marketing sales.
Sorry my post is so long, but these are just some thoughts I have and when I see a PHONE NUMBER sell for what is likely to be far more that what they paid for the domain to back it, I can't help but to see the writing on the wall.
The market is adjusting to step around the obstacles, distractions and expense to growth... the domainers.
GoPC
