Why are so many LLL.com on the market?

[Poker]

how the heck do you have 25K post THEO!

Advertise one of your own sites every other day by posting links on dnforum and you'll get there too.

 

[Theo]

Advertise one of your own sites every other day by posting links on dnforum and you'll get there too.

Feel free to peruse my stats since 2004 - I'm known for holding long conversation exchanges. If you're referring to DomainGang, there's less than 50 posts in the DNForum subforum

 

[furca]

There are so many:

http://www.dnforum.com/f539/xah-com-thread-429270.html
http://www.dnforum.com/f539/suj-com-thread-429247.html
http://www.dnforum.com/f539/czf-com-thread-428432.html
http://www.dnforum.com/f539/ctj-com-sale-thread-428116.html
http://www.dnforum.com/f539/xvc-com-6k-thread-428462.html

 

[stuff]

I remember when elequa bought 3 letters in bulk for $300-$500 range from other member here. now everyone wants at least 5k for his 3 letter domain
didn`t buy then and will not buy now

 

[PRED]

agree with stuff
they are still wildly overpriced imho

how can say qzx.com for example be worth $3900 minimum?
of course theres a really vague chance some company in china may want, very vague. then theres a good chance they take by wipo or not be prepared to pay what even you paid

money far better spent on 2 word service coms, or hunting for bargains, putting towards a one worder

dont get me wrong, LLL are beautiful things when you get a really good one. or m,emorable one and you can develop out
you at least have a fighting chance with a strong generic or memorable to develop

i too remember seeing the worst LLL.com selling on ebay in around 2001 for low xxx and i was domaining then, and thought who's want them. of course wish i had bought them all, but the principle of thing many are crap and will not sell to an enduser is still a valid thought

better to buy good ones

rick latona even just sold sus.com for only 10 or 11k i think at his auctions. thats an absolute cracker imho
memorable, brandable, palindrome, looks wicked
gimme one of them , rather than 2 or three crappy LLL imho

 

[Poohnix]

Compared to other domains, LLL.coms are the ones I get by far the most unsolicited inquiries from end users for. Some of them periodically get 2-3 inquiries per week.
Not only for the letter combinations you'd expect either, although some obviously are more popular than others.
I don't have many "bad" combinations, but one (with a Q and another "bad" letter) gets ok traffic... (It used to belong to a Quality assurance firm.)

But no, this isn't the time to actively try to sell LLL.coms... (Although I'm running an experiment in Dublin, to see what happens.)
I agree with Stian though, the market shows some tendencies to go up again really soon.

 

[Biggie]

I remember when elequa bought 3 letters in bulk for $300-$500 range from other member here. now everyone wants at least 5k for his 3 letter domain
didn`t buy then and will not buy now

once you've owned a few lll.com, then the thrill is gone


it's the trophy for an upstarts portfolio

that's why, every now and then you see a lot of them for sale


with each "rotation" from domainer to domainer, the price goes up, then maybe down....depending on the "financial status" of the owner.


then too, with a growing number of legal issues where the acronyms contain same letters of well known brands...they've become more risky.


it's why you see the rise in pricing for nnn.com, which has been averaging higher than many recent lll.com prices


another aspect is that many buyers of lll.com are only in it to flip, without looking at the long range potential or time to wait.


the roi for most "flippers" now of lll.com is probably less than 30% profit, where long range investors are seeking to double and up


imo...

 

[furca]

http://www.dnforum.com/f525/gnq-com-5500-a-thread-429517.html

 

[Theo]

The money for LLL .com's - as with most other domains - is in the end-user buyers.

 

[DTalk]

The money for LLL .com's - as with most other domains - is in the end-user buyers.

Agreed - But, there are serious risks with end users.

LLL.com's are exceptionally vulnerable to WIPO, because so many organisations use 3-letter acronyms for their business. Those acronyms are either an actual registered TM - or, they can claim a TM for 'general useage'.


EG:


- If you park an LLL.com (whilst, say, waiting for an offer), you risk some parking link, sometime, appearing on your LLL.com parked page that infringes on some end user's TM - somewhere....And, therefore, you risk a WIPO on the domain for bad faith usage (eg Lufthansa taking LH.com - lost because of parking page links).


- Even if your LLL.com is not parked, getting a seemingly innocent request by email, asking if your LLL.com is for sale, and, if so, what price would you ask, can be a WIPO trap......ie If your LLL.com is the TM of an end user, and is not actively developed, and, you reply saying that your LLL.com is for sale, and quoting a price, then, you risk that reply being used against you in a WIPO as bad faith usage (ie it could be claimed you have no proper use for the domain other than to profiteer from it at the expense of the TM holder - ie bad faith use of it).


- If you proactively contact end users that use/advertise the letters as an acronym for their business, then you risk a WIPO for TM infringement.


Need to be really careful to protect your investment, if you have LLL.com's.

.

 

[Theo]

What if I just shifted the paradigm with my latest LLL .com sale? Including the tm clause

No, what one needs is sticking to their gut feeling before investing in the names - or LLL .com's for that matter - that will eventually sell, regardless of what others believe.

See, a lot of "fear and loathing" in this business won't get people move ahead.

I say, f@ck that.

Watch the Sedo sales reports.

 

[DomainMagnate]

I remember when elequa bought 3 letters in bulk for $300-$500 range from other member here. now everyone wants at least 5k for his 3 letter domain
didn`t buy then and will not buy now

Same here, never bought one and not planning to, unless I stumble upon a really good quick flipping opportunity.

Frankly I think it's not worth buying an LLL.com to try to sell to an end user, the chances are simply too low - this is not a generic. However the higher quality ones can be a good purchase if prices keep going down.

 

[katherine]

I don't think LLL are that risky, the ones that were lost through wipo were usually parked and displayed infringing ads. Now some rulings are extreme, LH.com being a good example. So don't park valuable domains.

The bottom line is that LLL are coveted domains, with that type of domain the likelihood of a nasty fight against a reverse hijacker may possibly be higher, on the other hand we are not looking to own crap domains that nobody wants
If you are risk-adverse, domaining is not the right industry for you.

 

[DTalk]

So don't park valuable domains.

If you are risk-adverse, domaining is not the right industry for you.

Agreed on both points...


My point wasn't to avoid them as investments, but, to understand the vulnerability - then, protect yourself.....eg common sense things, like don't park them - and, direct your LLL.com's to an obviously non TM-infringing, site. That way you can't be WIPO'd, or reverse hijacked.

 

[Theo]

Again, nonsense. You can park anything, even LL .com's

Here's a tip for the uninitiated: form a corporation by that domain name, set up Internet advertising as the main function and you're good to go. If parking were illegal Sedo and Parked would be in the courtrooms daily.

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

A lot of ignorance in this thread. Personally have done over 7 figs worth of LLL over the years and by far it is the easiest to evaluate, therefore invest in and nearly nail an exact roi in the reseller market. I started out with mainly acronyms 5+ years ago because of this ease.

 

[DTalk]

My whole point here is NOT a comment about whether LLL.com's are a good investment, or not (I happen to think many of them are)....Only that they have some peculiarities that it'd be wise for domainers to manage carefully, on a common sense basis, to protect that investment.

You can park anything, even LL .com's

Of course you can - but, why would you with LLL's...??


Generally, the parking rev from LLL's is tiny, anyway (and, if it isn't very samll, it'll prob be because the LLL.com is confusingly similar to an established TM mark, anyway)....Plus....a couple of TM-infringing links on your LLL parked page - over time - invites some ratbag to try to steal the domain from you in a WIPO....And, in LH's case, Lufthansa succeeded.


Not a lot of upside to going that route, imo.

Here's a tip for the uninitiated: form a corporation by that domain name, set up Internet advertising as the main function and you're good to go.

If the effect of incorporation (and declared business purpose) is still a parked page on your LLL.com domain - carrying miscellaneous links - including possible TM infringements - then, this is nonsense.


Just because your LLL is a regged corporation - and, its declared main business is Internet Advertising - doesn't mean your LLL (that is, itself, say, identical, or confusingly similar, to the TM of a major corp) can then carry links on its own web page that infringe on a holder's TM.


...If I owned the domain, fox/com - and incorporated it, and declared that its business was Internet Advertising - and, then, my fox/com site carried links advertising (among other things) news sites, Current Affairs programs (for multiple providers), etc etc - are you really arguing that my domain, fox/com, would be safe from a possible (probable) WIPO from News Corp...?!?

If parking were illegal Sedo and Parked would be in the courtrooms daily.

Of course, Parking's not illegal...


But, typing in 'Sedo/com' & 'Parked/com' won't bring up a page full of ads (some of) which infringe my (or anyone else's) TM....Typing in your (parked) LLL/com probably will (incorporated, or not).


In this regard, Sedo & Parked simply facilitate & aggregate - provide a conduit - for advertising links for other domains. Their own domains (Sedo/com & Parked/com) don't carry the ads directly.


...And, the terms, 'Sedo' & 'Parked', themselves, do not infringe on someone else's known TM....Your LLL.com may well.


But, if you turn your LLL.com into a bona fide Ad Links service provider (serving ads to other domains - a la Sedo & Parked etc) - and your LLL.com page, itself, doesn't actually carry the Ad Links - then, that'd be fine, imo.

 

[Theo]

There are plenty of LLL .com domains that generate tremendous revenue from parking. I don't see why one should feel inclined not to profit from the traffic and clickthrough rates, as long as PPC is still making some healthy returns. Maybe in 5 years rates will change but currently a LLL .com is not different from any other domain, when traffic is comparable.

Again, you introduce absurd parameters to suit your argument; there would be no way to own a famous mark such as fox.com because for the most part those LLL .com's are with the tm holders.

What I have an issue with is with companies that acquire tm's after the registration of a LLL .com in which case some have successfully wrestled those domains away from their legitimate owners.

It's all a matter of selecting carefully what you register or buy. I do not condone tm violations, however as I explained when these tm's were established retroactively there should be no sympathy for the tm holders.

 

[DTalk]

There are plenty of LLL .com domains that generate tremendous revenue from parking. I don't see why one should feel inclined not to profit from the traffic and clickthrough rates,

Totally agree. Domainers should be able to park their domains, and financially benefit from their power. But, sometimes, discretion is the better part of valor.

Again, you introduce absurd parameters to suit your argument; there would be no way to own a famous mark such as fox.com because for the most part those LLL .com's are with the tm holders.

Okay......Here's a realistic case.....I own an LLL.com that is the exact anagram for a Japanese bank (they currently use the same letters with a .jp domain).....If I parked that domain - and financial services links showed up on the parked page - I could be at serious risk of losing this valuable LLL.com domain to them in a WIPO, if they argued my bad faith use of the domain related to their common usage & TM of the letters (a la LH.com).....I'd be nuts to park it, imo.

That's not an unusual situation with LLL's imo.....Virtually every LLL is likely to be an anagram for some corporate, somewhere, in the world.


But, if I use this LLL.com for some purpose that does NOT involve financial services, I'd prob be okay, I believe.


If you have a valuable LLL.com - just be careful, guys...

What I have an issue with is with companies that acquire tm's after the registration of a LLL .com in which case some have successfully wrestled those domains away from their legitimate owners

Again, completely agree. This is outrageous. Plain theft, imo. 'Ownership' of a domain should mean 'ownership'. Anyone wants it, should have to negotiate with the owner of it. End of, imo.

By what authority do these WIPO panels make & enforce these decisions, anyway? Have the limits to their legal standing to order domain transfers been tested in the real courts? Do we know they have the legal authority?


I go further....I think its a disgrace that the domain 'owner' - who has paid good money to 'purchase' a domain - does not, in fact, own the domain 'freehold' (as we would say) - but only has the right to use it, subject to an annual fee...ie lease it. The notion that millions of dollars can be invested to build empires around a domain, and for the 'owner' of that domain not to really own it, but only, effectively, lease it, is absurd.

I wouldn't 'buy' & 'own' my house subject to the payment of an annual lease fee - I want to own it, after its paid for. It should be the same with domains, imo. When its paid for, you own it. Some domains are worth a lot more than many homes.


If the true ownership concept around domains was properly based, then, these rinky-dink panel issues wouldn't arise.

.

 

[PRED]

Totally agree with above post