UltSearch: The $82 million/ year man?

[Focus]

agreed, picked up some nice .mp domains...like 123.mp,abc.mp,buy.mp,forums.mp,weblog.com, and some others....for those that don't know it's mariana pacific islands but being billed as "dot mobile phone" land rush was in dec. of 2004....still a ton of good ones just pricey..I got a special deal..

 

[Rubber Duck]

agreed, picked up some nice .mp domains...like 123.mp,abc.mp,buy.mp,forums.mp,weblog.com, and some others....for those that don't know it's mariana pacific islands but being billed as "dot mobile phone" land rush was in dec. of 2004....still a ton of good ones just pricey..I got a special deal..any thoughts on the rfid names?

Sorry, don't agree.

Dead duck for speculators due to high annual renewal costs. I have severely trimmed down my dot cn for that reason having mistakenly assumed that they would drop down in price a lot further than they have.

Without an active speculator market it is doubtful whether there will ever be a wider interest in the registery.

There was a lot of hype in alternative TLDs a couple of years back and I got dragged in and wished I hadn't. Let most of my dot TV, WS and CC drop now.

Best of Luck with these, but I would stand back and take a good hard look!

Dave Wrixon

 

[Focus]

They all are reg'd for 10 years...dont ask me how or why..can't talk about it!

but I agree with you....I merely have to sit on these and wait for free nearly....

 

[GT Web]

Mocus, why did you bring these names up here? You already posted them in the appraisal and basically everyone there said they were worthless. Resellers will not go anywhere near those domains because of the high fees and very limited popularity...

and I think we need a new definition for the phrase "land rush" because there was no such thing in the .mp market.

 

[DaddyHalbucks]

Mocus, why did you bring these names up here? You already posted them in the appraisal and basically everyone there said they were worthless. Resellers will not go anywhere near those domains because of the high fees and very limited popularity...

and I think we need a new definition for the phrase "land rush" because there was no such thing in the .mp market.

He brought them up because he was SPAMMING us.

 

[BLazeD]

^^^^ lol

Never heard of .mp landrush either

 

[Focus]

not doing this

 

[seeker]

as a neutral observer, I have to disagree with you Mocus.
GT is only pointing out his opinion while you keep attacking him about his age etc...etc.....
let's all pass the peace pipe and go on with this thread.

 

[Focus]

not doing this

go back and read the posting by me and then by GT, and think about whether he is causing a conflict here or not..this is ridiculous...

Mocus, why did you bring these names up here? You already posted them in the appraisal and basically everyone there said they were worthless. Resellers will not go anywhere near those domains because of the high fees and very limited popularity...

and I think we need a new definition for the phrase "land rush" because there was no such thing in the .mp market.

How would YOU feel if I posted this about you for absolutely NO REASON but to start an argument in a cool active thread?

 

[Rubber Duck]

not doing this

go back and read the posting by me and then by GT, and think about whether he is causing a conflict here or not..this is ridiculous...


How would YOU feel if I posted this about you for absolutely NO REASON but to start an argument in a cool active thread?

Can't take the heat? Get out of the kitchen.

 

[Focus]

Is that what this is here? you are being ohh so juvenille..heat? lol, you dont know what heat is. :dead:

I think I am a little too advanced for this forum lately, at least in this post now that the flamers arrived..you guys seem to prefer to burn bridges then to build them. Bad Business. Karma is coming...

 

[GT Web]

You had no right to bring up your names in this thread. We were talking about the UltSearch sale and then you spam your .mp names?

Yes, I think you are totally right, you are way to advanced for this forum...I didn't "flame" anyone, I simply stated it was wrong of you to advertise your names in this thread.

 

[reclad]

i am stunned that sex.com was regged in may of 2004?? wooow... what were those silicon valley geeks thinking??? magic dotcom was registered in 1991. hey, 1991 - three years before sex.com? how incredibly stoopid was that?

I've been waiting for someone to put this young chappie on the right
track, but a 'domestic spat' broke out ...

Ok.

Somewhere earlier in this thread I noted that when Network Solutions
took over the .COM/NET/ORG registries, their security was so
APPALLING that it was REALLY EASY to have your domains stolen by
any clown who masqueraded as the owner.

Ask the earlier owner of SEX.com about domain theft, and how
many YEARS it took him to get this domain back.

No, it wasn't regged first in 2004 'whatchamacallit', that's
probably the date it was restored to him, but I'll let
you read up on it. A SOBERING story. Do a Google with
keywords Sex.com domain theft, or something similar.

 

[peekaboo]

I've been waiting for someone to put this young chappie on the right
track, but a 'domestic spat' broke out ...

Ok.

Somewhere earlier in this thread I noted that when Network Solutions
took over the .COM/NET/ORG registries, their security was so
APPALLING that it was REALLY EASY to have your domains stolen by
any clown who masqueraded as the owner.

Ask the earlier owner of SEX.com about domain theft, and how
many YEARS it took him to get this domain back.

No, it wasn't regged first in 2004 'whatchamacallit', that's
probably the date it was restored to him, but I'll let
you read up on it. A SOBERING story. Do a Google with
keywords Sex.com domain theft, or something similar.

oh u genius everybody knows that hijack story, which has nothing to do with my comment. can't u be a little more intuitive to realize that it was my typo when i wrote 'may 2004'? i actually meant to say may 1994, as obvious in my further comment that stated it was registered full three years after magic dotcom was registered. yes, that's what i am trying to say. there were people who registered many many many other domains, before one of them bothered to register sex.com, which proves my point that widely circulated stereotype of computer 'geeks' as being nerdy, asexual beings is right on the money (no pun intended.)


actually, i just realized magic dotcom was registered not in 1991, but on august 3rd 1989 - which is some FIVE YEARS BEFORE sex com

1989???

 

[DomainSalesAgent]

.

 

[reclad]

> keep posting and ignore the occasional "spats"...

Yup... I walked into that one didn't I ...
If only "whatchamacallit" would post in English, I
wouldn't be so confused.

> when were domains first available to be registered by Netsol?

Good question. My memory says '97, but that could be plus or minus
a year. Netsol sent out those original (paper) rereg. forms,
and I've still got some/copies in a box .... somewhere... got a lot
of boxes in storage. I'll have a look and if I stumble across
one I'll post the date.

I guess those first rereg. forms are collector items now ..

There must be an echo of that first reg. year somewhere online.

Cheers.

 

[peekaboo]

I believe that magic.com and a few others were automatically ALLOCATED to those companies and not registered as such.
For example intel.com was created in 25-mar-1986...

nothing can be 'automatically allocated,' it has to have its 'human touch' behind it.

does anyone know when was the 'regular public' let-in into registering domains? obviously, the sex guy did it in may 1994, which i think was a slightly before the appearance of netscape browser.

 

[furca]

http://www.jottings.com/100-oldest-dot-com-domains.htm

 

[peekaboo]

http://www.jottings.com/100-oldest-dot-com-domains.htm

hehe, that's too old of a list. have u got something for 93-96?

 

[reclad]

[whatchamacallit] wrote:
> nothing can be 'automatically allocated,'
> it has to have its 'human touch' behind it.

Nothing ? whatchamacallit.

... I have trouble with long Scottish names ..
... may I just call you 'Whatcha" ?


> does anyone know when was the 'regular public' let-in into
> registering domains? obviously, the sex guy did it in may 1994,

Thanks to [duncan] for

http://www.jottings.com/100-oldest-dot-com-domains.htm

Hard to tell whether there's any 'public' there. From the obviously
non-corporate names, I suspect that most/all of those were
network-manager's 'handles' at various Educational/Military/Corporate
Unix setups. Is a later-dates list available ?

Although I was involved in getting an 'edu' registered in '91,
my first .COM reg. was July '93 and there were about 5000 Dot-Coms
before that, as I recall.

> which i think was a slightly before the appearance of netscape browser.

Of course in those early days, the 'net' didn't include the 'www'.

It was all E-Mail, FTP, TelNet (before that became a serious security
problem), Gopher, ListServs, UseNet etc.

I do recall (circa '93-4) trying to make the early browser 'Mosaic' work
on a 9.6 K line.. seemed like magic in those text-based days, but SLOOOOW.

We ran most of the 'fun' things on Unix or Xenix. Seems strange now
with 'free' Linux distros everywhere, but multi-user Unix was a VERY
expensive OS. There had to be a solid financial reason for an
individual to justify buying it.