lease prices

[Biggie]

this is just a personal observation:


when posting names for lease, that monthly price should be reflective of the domains' overall value, graduated @ an interval.


the monthly lease amount should not be priced so high, where it no longer becomes a viable option for the user, especially without providing some statistical evidence of it's worthiness.


ie: traffic and revenue stats, pr , etc. when that domains' intrinsic value is not obvious.


though each seller retains the right to set their own price -

for "some names" i've seen listed around here.... couldn't see anyone leasing them at those monthly rates, particularly if considering the total value of the domain, as is.

still, Good Fortune if you are, but if not.....


imo....

 

[Theo]

Lease to own is the only option worthy of a lease. Essentially, the seller gets 'rent' with the domain being secured per the terms, e.g. miss X number of payments and the lease ends.

 

[Jack Gordon]

Agree with both statements. But overvaluation is not a problem that is unique to leasing...

 

[Biggie]

But overvaluation is not a problem that is unique to leasing...

that's true as well, but when trying to utilize new options for one's domain names,

to over-price with leasing, doesn't leave much of an option, for a potential.


keeping in mind, that the goal is to reduce the upfront cost to purchase that domain.


imo....

 

[raoul]

its about the one I posted?

 

[Biggie]

its about the one I posted?

Hi

not about your post, specifically, as I have brought this subject up before when "domain leasing" threads started popping up across the forums.

I think RS has posted about a lease deal on his blog....then it became the "new" option to try.


though on the low, many had been doing it for years.


but here's my rationale:

for any domain up for lease, what would be your BIN price?


then.... for that client, you want to offer a monthly amount that they can afford....over however many months it takes to pay balance- plus interest!


say the price is $10K, then a three yr lease @ $260.00 per month (plus interest) would be more reasonable, than $900 per month for a year.


the smart move is....."the longer the lease deal, the more you earn"

if you can read between that line, then you'll be on to something.


imo...

 

[raoul]

The ordinary people have greater ideas than most domainers, they just not have the cash. So lets sit together and make some deal.

 

[raoul]

So here is my definition of a lease:

- leaser has full access to domain but registration stays in my posession
-"soft contract", meaning any time leaser wants to get out - he is welcome
-Hard commitment from my side - 5 years no other leaser + not sold to anyone, after 5 years possebillety to release, or buy
-Fixed amount for buying after 5 years

So advantages IMO to leaser would be, that he could TRY tu build a business, with only a fraction of its cost, while I take a part of the investment on me, and could cash good when its a succes.

 

[Cyger]

I like the way Nokta Domains is structuring their leases. They're fair, based on a physical real estate model (which people can understand, and which I think fits premium domain names), and the lessee earns a credit on every payment made to the lessor. The full details were in their interview just a couple of weeks ago

 

[Biggie]

I like the way Nokta Domains is structuring their leases. They're fair, based on a physical real estate model (which people can understand, and which I think fits premium domain names), and the lessee earns a credit on every payment made to the lessor. The full details were in their interview just a couple of weeks ago

as said before, this is not about any specific individual or post



but, how many names have "you" actually leased from him or leased a domain to anyone else, in comparison...to say what's fair or not?


to me, that could be seen as "less of an endorsement" attempt.


imo....