closed Solar-Energy.com

[eeedc]

SolarEnergy.com sold for 1,650,000 USD in 2008. I believe its the highest price ever paid for a green/alternative energy domain name...so far. However, as I recall, I think some of the business interest was included with the sale.

So someone "paid" $1.6M for SolarEnergy.com and put up a comming-soon page? I would not beleive press releases from over-the-counter "penney" (really UNDER a penny in this case) stock companies. And the guy selling whitehouse.com got several million dollars offers also.

 

[Gerry]

We are still waiting for doc com or anyone else to explain why solar-energy.com can be valued at $x,xxx but solar--energy.com is reg fee since neither version would get natural or typein traffic and the SEO value would seem to be very similar (unless I am missing something here)?

Keep waiting.

And clearly you are missing something. Actually, I think you are missing several things.

If I have to explain everything, every simple little thing in detail, then that can only mean that some here have no business being here or being in the business of domaining.

I think I have spent quite a bit of time being as succinct as possible and explained things in detail that anyone can follow along. Not sure what else I can do to convey or explain the opinions (and facts and data).

To consistently discard one thing by raising an issue with another thing is simply taking the matter of track and detracting from the issue at hand. Recess is over, kids. Time to put the toys and games up.

This is a damn good name and if people are not seeing this, well...I've wasted enough of my time. Definitely. I have wasted enough of my time.

Personally, I am still waiting for domainers to come to the realization that the same rules domainers created for themselves 10-15 years ago are being used today.

 

[David G]

Keep waiting.

It's fairly obvious to the experienced members here a reason you can't or won't directly address that issue (first discussed by member whoatedog) in a short and concise way is because in reality there's no significant difference in SEO potential between a single or double hyphen. Possibly the only variation in SEO value would be because the SEs may (maybe they don't?) quality ban or otherwise penalize a double--hyphen.com to a greater degree than a single-hyphen.com. Also, a singular looks visually better vs a double hyphen (but prettier does not really add any real value). Beyond that there is no good reason I can think of to pay $xxxx or $xxxxx vs getting at reg fee the double hyphenated name since both can be search engine optimized and developed roughly equally well. However, both will get basically zero typein/natural traffic.

 

[Bill Roy]

David, Google DOES penalise double hyphens.

It may also be worth looking at Ron's sales reports on DNJ, find out how many 'double' hyphenated sales have been reported against number of 'single' hyphenated sales.

 

[David G]

David, Google DOES penalise double hyphens.

It may also be worth looking at Ron's sales reports on DNJ, find out how many 'double' hyphenated sales have been reported against number of 'single' hyphenated sales.

I did not say they do not penalize but said it was possible. How do you know it as a fact? A reason you never see double hyphen salee is because of so few being reg'd in the first place.

P.S.By an amazing and incredible coincidence just ran across this a minute after posting above: Sold on Flippa: Shipping-Container-Housing.com – $35,000

 

[Bill Roy]

I did not say they do not penalize but said it was possible. How do you know it as a fact?

I know this to be a fact because I have researched it previously.

A reason you never see double hyphen salee is because of so few being reg'd in the first place.

And why are they not registered? (Clue the answer is above!)

 

[tetrapak]

I'm yet to see successful double hyphen (word--word) sites. It's not only plain ugly, absolutely not brandable, but I don't believe it is not already penalized or won't be. It makes no sense that such domain would get the same ranking benefits as a single hyphen name. Why not reg then word$˘^˘°^˘°^word.com domains, after all it consists of only two words. Anyway, just look at the latest single hyphenated sales, then show us double hyphenated sales of similar volumes:

Home-fashion.com $2,688
Teen-chat.com $3,200
casinos-on-line.com $1,000
net-now.com $2,088
metro-properties.com €10,000
exam-edu.com $8,055
free-movies-online.com $4,875
halloween-candy.com $3,000

I will rather not even put German domain sales, because it would fill the whole page.
Solar-Energy.com is an obvious $x,xxx+ name.

 

[David G]

A substantial double hyphen Flippa sale reported here: http://morganlinton.com/flippa-sells-606934-in-websites-last-week/

Not saying they can't be sold for good money but only saying they get basically zero natural traffic and mostly talking about search engine optimation value of one or 2 hyphens (not necessarily sale prices).

 

[Bill Roy]

David, if you are referring to the domain Shipping-Container-Housing.com then that is a 3 word domain separated with each word separated by a hyphen, a 'double hyphen' as referred to in the above posts are where two hyphens are adjacent (g--m.com), if you have a five word domain and each word is separated by single hyphens then this would not be a four hyphenated as in the discussion under way above, but rather a domain containing 4 single hyphens!

Hope this helps.

 

[katherine]

It all boils down to credibility.
A name like solar-energy.com has credibility - many end users don't mind the hyphen, after all it's a much cheaper alternative to the 'real thing' and it's the second best alternative (or the third if you'd rather prefer solarenergy.net/.org).
Double hyphens are deemed too 'artificial' and rightfully so. You could as well add a trailing '1' or any random character.
That's why there almost no reported sales.
One single hyphen between two strong keywords is okay.

Oh yes, they will probably get little or no natural traffic. While type-in is nice to have the majority of websites must be getting most of their traffic through search engines or alternate channels. We probably all agree that SolarEnergy.com is the first choice, and that due to the hyphen and lack of type-in solar-energy.com cannot claim a similar price tag. It is a cheaper, yet credible alternative.

I'm not privy to the sales at Flippa but I believe it's sales of developed websites mostly. The domains alone are worth next to nothing.

 

[David G]

OK, good points made by everyone.

BTW, am both surprised and also was not aware until this thread there were so many members here who liked (or did not dislike) hyphenated domains.

Bye, i'm outta here now.

 

[tetrapak]

Double hyphens are deemed too 'artificial' and rightfully so. You could as well add a trailing '1' or any random character.

Actually "1" domains are pretty nice, and they are fetching good prices both at auctions and end user sales. Hotels1, Illustration1 (my project), Music1 are all very brandable.

 

[katherine]

Food for thought: 1 .de domain out of 2 has at least one hyphen.
So there is a cultural dimension in domains

Personally I don't like hyphens. I avoid them but we have to look beyond our own tastes.
The hyphen is unpopular in the US (also in personal surnames) so US domainers have a strong bias against that type of domain.
The US market is not representative of the rest of the world.

 

[eeedc]

.
A name like solar-energy.com has credibility - many end users don't mind the hyphen, after all it's a much cheaper alternative to the 'real thing' and it's the second best alternative (or the third if you'd rather prefer solarenergy.net/.org).
.

The "real thing" solarenergy.com might be for sale at a bankruptcy auction soon given that it's stock is a tenth of a cent.
And I am not sure if solarPOWER.com or alternativeenergy or alternativepower would also be the "first choice" although likely in the same first-tier.