For Sale mirror.net

[hiOsilver]

Mole,

BD & ULt are afraid only of a more level playing field. If they buy a WLS on every name without coniseration of if it is likely to expire and when, then they will go bankrupt.

Actually, if they had to trim back their grabs of expiring domains, it might be better than the $3000 - $5000 or so that they are now paying for random 3-letter domains on Namewinner.

Just as they buy lots of Snaps now, they will buy lots of WLS. But some posters on DNF have maintained that BD & Ult will buy up all of the WLS subscriptions. That is obviously false.

 

[EM @MAJ.com]

Originally posted by hiOsilver
Mole,

BD & ULt are afraid only of a more level playing field. If they buy a WLS on every name without coniseration of if it is likely to expire and when, then they will go bankrupt.

Actually, if they had to trim back their grabs of expiring domains, it might be better than the $3000 - $5000 or so that they are now paying for random 3-letter domains on Namewinner.

Just as they buy lots of Snaps now, they will buy lots of WLS. But some posters on DNF have maintained that BD & Ult will buy up all of the WLS subscriptions. That is obviously false.

I second to that!

wew!

TW

 

[EM @MAJ.com]

Originally posted by hiOsilver
I am in the pool on this one, but the bid is already to $601. No thanks. Pricing on the auction sites (NW & Pool) is making these companies a lot of $.

It is a win win situation for them drop bid/auction type of business. For example, if someone bid on goodname.com a lot of member will try to bid one another ... continously rising up the price of the domain. Even them may outbid you if they want the name. Now DropW join this kind of business. Oh well, club drop and godaddy will still be able to give me good names with traffics.

And besides I look for names with established traffic that will only cost me a $.

Cheers,
tw

 

[Beachie]

Originally posted by hiOsilver
I am in the pool on this one, but the bid is already to $601. No thanks. Pricing on the auction sites (NW & Pool) is making these companies a lot of $. And people dislike the idea of paying $24 to NSI for WLS? Yeh, I much rather pay $2000 to Namewinner than to pay $24 to NSI.

2000 / 24 = 80

Figured out the problem with WLS yet?

 

[EM @MAJ.com]

Bring on WLS ...

TW

 

[Beachie]

Originally posted by TheWatcher
Bring on WLS ...

TW

BD is averaging $2k+ per day on domains - that's 80 reusable WLSubscriptions per day. How are you going to compete with that?

Let's say that every day they buy 80+ subscriptions. If the names don't drop they simply reuse the WLS. They will scoop up WLS's many months in advance of the drops, because they can afford to. I would say 10 names per day are worth catching (ignoring traffic names), so every day they buy 8 days worth of WLS's. Now throw in UltSearch, who will fill in the gaps.

Your ability to get a good name will be zero, unless you take a gamble and buy a WLS long before the domain drops. Of course, most don't drop, so you will waste your money.

 

[hiOsilver]

Originally posted by Beachie


BD is averaging $2k+ per day on domains - that's 80 reusable WLSubscriptions per day. How are you going to compete with that?

Let's say that every day they buy 80+ subscriptions. If the names don't drop they simply reuse the WLS. They will scoop up WLS's many months in advance of the drops, because they can afford to. I would say 10 names per day are worth catching (ignoring traffic names), so every day they buy 8 days worth of WLS's. Now throw in UltSearch, who will fill in the gaps.

Your ability to get a good name will be zero, unless you take a gamble and buy a WLS long before the domain drops. Of course, most don't drop, so you will waste your money.

BD will always be BD. This is not about us vs. BD. You can debate whether BD will be better or worse off. How many names does BD pick up per day now?

BD will not be able to put a WLS on every good name. That is the sure way for them to give away their profits and eventually bankrupt themselves. They will not buy a WLS on a name that it is too far from expiration. They will have to look at a name, decide how likely it is to drop, how far it is from expiration, and how valuable they think it is, then they will buy a WLS. They have been doing the same with purchasing Snaps. YOU will have a much better chance to get a name you really want under WLS than you do now. And, you wont have to pay $5000 to Pool or Namewinner to get it.

Don't you see where things are headed now without WLS? I was not so sure a year ago. But the changes in the last year make it so, so clear now.

 

[EM @MAJ.com]

Originally posted by hiOsilver


BD will always be BD. This is not about us vs. BD. You can debate whether BD will be better or worse off. How many names does BD pick up per day now?

BD will not be able to put a WLS on every good name. That is the sure way for them to give away their profits and eventually bankrupt themselves. They will not buy a WLS on a name that it is too far from expiration. They will have to look at a name, decide how likely it is to drop, how far it is from expiration, and how valuable they think it is, then they will buy a WLS. They have been doing the same with purchasing Snaps. YOU will have a much better chance to get a name you really want under WLS than you do now. And, you wont have to pay $5000 to Pool or Namewinner to get it.

Don't you see where things are headed now without WLS? I was not so sure a year ago. But the changes in the last year make it so, so clear now.

Thank you for answering it for me hiOsilver.

TW

 

[stuff]

Originally posted by Beachie


BD is averaging $2k+ per day on domains - that's 80 reusable WLSubscriptions per day. How are you going to compete with that?

Let's say that every day they buy 80+ subscriptions. If the names don't drop they simply reuse the WLS. They will scoop up WLS's many months in advance of the drops, because they can afford to. I would say 10 names per day are worth catching (ignoring traffic names), so every day they buy 8 days worth of WLS's. Now throw in UltSearch, who will fill in the gaps.

Your ability to get a good name will be zero, unless you take a gamble and buy a WLS long before the domain drops. Of course, most don't drop, so you will waste your money.

I agree!

 

[888]

Funny a thread titled mirror.net becomes a WLS debate, again :dead:.

People, did you own the snap, godaddy AND drop wizard slot for mirror.net? If not, you have zero chance to get mirror.net if WLS arrives. Because only the first person can get the WLS slot, and today's snap, godaddy, dropwizard and other users will rush to get the one and only one slot.

(I know Drop Wizard has just changed to auction format, no need to remind me that. I just assume the first person placing an order at Drop Wizard will buy the WLS slot.)

 

[mohno]

$5,001/proxy

 

[Bob]

Originally posted by Beachie


BD is averaging $2k+ per day on domains - that's 80 reusable WLSubscriptions per day. How are you going to compete with that?

Let's say that every day they buy 80+ subscriptions. If the names don't drop they simply reuse the WLS. They will scoop up WLS's many months in advance of the drops, because they can afford to. I would say 10 names per day are worth catching (ignoring traffic names), so every day they buy 8 days worth of WLS's. Now throw in UltSearch, who will fill in the gaps.

Your ability to get a good name will be zero, unless you take a gamble and buy a WLS long before the domain drops. Of course, most don't drop, so you will waste your money.

This is very correct Beachie.

If BD averages $2k/day on domains, like you said,that is about 80 REUSABLE snaps. If they continue this pace for one month, they have 2400 WLS subscriptions. After one year they have 29,200 WLS subsriptions.

As they start, no doubt they will put WLS on expiring good names. As time progresses, they will use all of their WLS on the good names. With 29,400 WLS in their back pocket, and all of the good names covered for the next day /week / month / 6 months - they will then begin to put WLS on the mediocre names. As more time progresses, they will then virtually have a monopoly on the WLS market. This doesnot factor in the other large players - just BD.

If you thnk you cannot get a name now, wait until then. It will be worse with WLS. Sure in the begining it will be alright for the small players, but you have to take off your blinders and get rid of your tunnel vision. Successful business models look long-term. Look at this situation in the long-term. It is bleak is WLS happens.

One other point: WLS will certianly not put BD or ULT out of business. It is quite the contrary and will almost ensure that they have a virtual monopoly over the dropping names market. If the competitive bidding system stays, then BD and ULT might get caught up in the frenzy and have to shell out 4-5 figures for ONE name. If they have the WLS on the name for a mere $24, how will this put then out of business? If I were BD, I would be ALL for WLS. It will only ensure their monopoly in the dropping name market over the long-term. By forcing the big players to shell out more $$ for the good names means that they will have to limit their expenditures on other names - THUS INCREASING THE ODDS SMALL PLAYERS CAN GET GOOD NAMES. If they can lock up names for $24 with a WLS, small players will be removed from the game. . .

-Bob

 

[StockDoctor]

Originally posted by Bob

WLS will certianly not put BD or ULT out of business. It is quite the contrary and will almost ensure that they have a virtual monopoly over the dropping names market. If I were BD, I would be ALL for WLS. It will only ensure their monopoly in the dropping name market over the long-term
-Bob

Hi Bob

One question. Why is BD against the wls?

Can I suggest we all form a coop, pool our funds, set up a prog to compete for wls regs, and assign members to call, write and fax each and every worthy name in which we don't get the wls. We do this effectively and we may be the next take-over candidate on BD's screens. I'd participate just to plain drive em nuts. Doc

 

[GeorgeK]

I'm sure BD is against WLS for the same reason a lot of others are, namely that we don't need another Verisign-tax, which raises *everyone's*cost of business, and tries to reimpose their monopoly control over the industry.

When the politicians in Washington are trying to raise taxes, I'm sure BuyDomains is against those too.

 

[Bob]

Originally posted by Stocdoctor



One question. Why is BD against the wls?

Doc

I do not know their stance, but from the logistics, I would be surprised if they were against it. . .

Sorry if I made an insinuation that I was not supposed to. :shy:

-Bob

 

[StockDoctor]

Originally posted by Bob


I do not know their stance, but from the logistics, I would be surprised if they were against it. . .

Sorry if I made an insinuation that I was not supposed to. :shy:

-Bob

Nope, your insinuation was correct. BD is one of the most outspoken parties against the wls. I just wondered if anyone knew the reason why? Last time I looked at their site, they had a fairly long post about it, and I just don't buy that they give a hoot about any injustices that may be hoisted upon us by that nasty ol Verislime. They have their own agenda and cost structure to worry about. On george's post, I think BD would trade places with Verislime in a minute given the opportunity, and then be all for the wls.

All this debate seems over complicated anyway. I'm a simple guy and the way I read it is:

BD is our competitor
BD does not want the wls
WLS will hurt our competitor
Bring on the wls

 

[actnow]

BD is our competitor
BD does not want a tax increase
A tax increase will hurt our competitor.
Bring on a tax increase.


A tax increase would also hurt me.

 

[jberryhill]

I personally believe that BD's public position may be a bit of "don't throw me in the briar patch" for precisely the logic posted here - obviously if they were known as WLS supporters, then there would be no shortage of sheep who were against it.

 

[Beachie]

Originally posted by hiOsilver
BD will always be BD. This is not about us vs. BD. You can debate whether BD will be better or worse off. How many names does BD pick up per day now?

BD will not be able to put a WLS on every good name. That is the sure way for them to give away their profits and eventually bankrupt themselves. They will not buy a WLS on a name that it is too far from expiration. They will have to look at a name, decide how likely it is to drop, how far it is from expiration, and how valuable they think it is, then they will buy a WLS. They have been doing the same with purchasing Snaps. YOU will have a much better chance to get a name you really want under WLS than you do now. And, you wont have to pay $5000 to Pool or Namewinner to get it.

Don't you see where things are headed now without WLS? I was not so sure a year ago. But the changes in the last year make it so, so clear now.

OK, a bit more economics for you:

There are around 10,000 common English words. There are also 676 two letter combinations. I think most of us will admit that the "premium" names are found in these two groups.

10676 * 3 extensions = 32028 domains.

I would get the expiry date of every one of the these names. I would then trim out all names that don't expire in the next 12 months. I've done this, and I can say that around 60% can be trimmed, leaving 12,811 domains. Multiply that by $24, gives you $307,468.

Put yourself in BD's shoes. They're currently spending $700,000 per year (I'd say that's a conservative estimate). Why wouldn't you spend $300k on day 1, knowing that every great domain that drops in the next 12 months is already yours?

BD may be publicly against WLS, but maybe that's just because if they were for it people might wonder why. Even if they're truly against it, I can guarantee they own a calculator and have a "Plan B".

(and that's assuming .ORG goes to WLS. If it doesn't, it's only $200k they have to spend on .COM and .NET)

 

[StockDoctor]

Nice twist actnow and good points you have there too Beachie.

Damn the torpedos, bring on the wls anyway.
Doc