Moniker.com Sells Photo.com For $1.25 Million
2010 May 4
Another great generic domain and another seven figure sale, as Moniker.com tells me tonight the brokered the domain, Photo.com for $1.25 Million.
These bang on category killers are hard to beat and always seem to sell.
We congratulate the Seller and Buyer.
And it doesn’t suck for Moniker.com either.
Loading ...
Who was the seller?
Photos.com is owned Getty.
Nice.
nice one… was this the chef’s first brokering deal
Over 1 billion Google indexed pages for “photo” … beating out both “photos” and “photography”.
.
the price seems TOO LOW to me
if the insurance-only insure.com has been sold for $16 million the REAL VALUE of the widely known and much more known and used word “photo” should be at least THREE TIMES HIGHER or $50 million and acquired by a BIG web or imaging company like Google or Microsoft or Canon etc.
.
99% — insure.com was not a pure domain sale – It was a developed site and not just a domain name that was parked. Almost like saying if MTV.com sold for $100m why is NTV.com only worth $50k.
Not comparing apples to apples here.
ok, Alan, but the price always seems too low for the very large potential market of a site based on photo.com
maybe, the right domain value is 5 or 10 million …that is very good for the buyier that acquired it for $1.25M
Good domains always seem low after the sale. The name is worth between $7 and $7 billion – just depends on what price the owner was happy to sell and the buyer was happy to pay.
Personally, I would not waste 1.25m on this domain or anywhere close but for a Kodak or somebody sure, probably worth more. All relative and hard to guess. Ranges vary way too much in this industry due to the number of intangible factors associated with each domain.
The only right value is how much the domain is worth to the buyers business plan. If you are a domain owner then anything over $1m gets media attention and its good for all of us.
yes, for Kodak, not for all
what’s better than a site like photo.com ?
Guys
This domain was at the last TRAFFIC NY auction so it got some publicity then and I would guess Moniker has in preparation for the auction and ever since reached out to all the brands that you mentioned trying to broker the domain.
Emm.. misspelling
Moniker.com tells me tonight the brokered the domain,
its the=they
what a sale
nice sale, and a very nice purchase
i think was a fair deal, slightly erring to the buyer getting the best deal
99%
“what’s better than a site like photo.com ?”
A domain like photo.com has alternatives like photos.com, picture.com, pictures.com – thats exactly why 1.25 M was probably top value for this domain.
Whenever a name has alternatives that easily switched with words which are just as commonly used in the same language it dilutes the value of any of them being some crazy number as value.
I can name 1,000 names better than this such as insurance.com, health.com, love.com, realestate.com etcccc … so many which have no other words that define in such power the same category.
In addition, you have the singular plural effect – if photos.com sold for 1.25M I have a feeling your comments and feelings would be the exact same.
however if realestate(s).com, insurance(s).com, love(s).com, etc… sold for 1.25 anyone would think the buyer was an idiot.
A category killer word is great but just because its a single word doesn’t mean its the only category killer for that field. Single words are sort of a domainers thing – many two words beat single words anyday.
This name happened to get around 10,000 people a month according to compete which was probably a big part of the valuation.
“A domain like photo.com has alternatives like photos.com, picture.com, pictures.com – thats exactly why 1.25 M was probably top value for this domain.”
but all them are already registered and the total number of photo related .com domains is just four
.
however, I always register the singular and plural of a domain (when I find both, of course)