UTT.com Sells On NameJet.com For $8,600, CWW.com Sells For $9,100, TTT.net sells For $6K & More
2011 October 26
Its been a while since we checked in on NameJet.com.
Over the last few days there have been some notable sales on the platfor,
Severl LLL domains have sold including UTT.com which sold for $8,600, CWW.com which sold for $9,100 and TTT.net which sold for $6,001.
A few other domains over the last week include:
| cruisetravel.com | $13,000 |
| switch.net | $3,655 |
| appetizers.net | $3,200 |
| buggy.net | $3,200 |
| unnu.com | $2,600 |
| safekit.com | $2,180 |
| symbol.org | $2,100 |
| realart.com | $2,000 |
| homebanking.net | $1,999 |
| changxiu.com | $1,600 |
| partystore.net | $1,450 |
| marketingstrategy.net | $1,320 |
| separate.net | $1,309 |
| rank.info | $1,210 |
| citycenter.net | $1,200 |
| etu.net | $1,011 |
| nazis.net | $1,008 |
Loading ...
Imagine what names like like UTT or CWW would’ve sold for in 2006.
Someone must have been desperate for some cash – these sales figures are laughable.
Desperate how?
Those “sales figures” were arbitrated by the free market… The same people who would’ve paid $35K for either one in 2006 voted with their pocketbooks and said that it was only worth $8600 in the latter part of 2011.
There’s no question there was a mania period in domain prices. Ignore the market hypers and carnival barkers. Numbers don’t lie. The question is, does it rebound and if so, how much… or were those prices just another beanie babies.
UTT.com is worth minimum $25,000, up to $150,000 to an end user. Many domainers would have bought UTT.com at $10,000 purely as a long-term investment…to sell that one at $8,600 is pitiful.
Hell, I’ve turned down $6,000 for Soc.TV!!!
See, that’s where you’re totally wrong.
These domains weren’t hunted down ‘in the wild’ from some unknowing owner who registered them in the 1990s. They were sold in the universal marketplace that everyone sees and follows. You can’t say many domainers would’ve paid more because it was presented to all domainers in the most efficient possible fashion and not a single one did…
… and if you seriously turned down $6K for soc.tv, you made a mistake.
I’d like to know what kind of monkey business goes on with these domains. UTT and CWW both came down the non-renewed path at namejet, and then were renewed by persons unknown and became wish list names. CWW originally expired on 6/18/2011 and was pending renewal or deletion on 7/5/11. Then it showed as being renewed on 7/24/11 with an expiration of 6/18/2016. Then on 10/4/11 it suddenly goes pending delete again. This was not a sale because the whois info does not change to pending delete when someone sells a name through namejet. So who is screwing with these names? Can network solutions really just do whatever they want once the name is expired? How does it go from from having 5 years left to pending delete? It was fine for 3 months after is was renewed. Maybe it is a case of invalid whois, but I thought the person filing the invalid whois claim is awarded the domain. UTT followed almost the exact same pattern and was previously owned by UT Starcom.
Thems some low figures for NameJet to have for LLL.com
@ mike…
See, that’s the problem with our domain business…..There is just NO genuine accountability – no body that has a mission to ensure & enforce consistent ethical standards.
The sequence of non-renewal, pending delete, renewal, then – mysteriously – pending delete again, that you outline re CWW.com & UTT.com, is a classic example.
Who knows what went on? WHY don’t we know what went on? WHO explains these anomalies? Where is the accountability?
What with the ‘Halvarez’ scam, the Registerfly disaster, often very odd, unexplained, domain progeny via the delete/pending delete/renewal process, and a totally ‘trust me’ system of auction…..and much, much, more….well….sometimes I think we’re all just mug punters, being taken for a ride in a loaded game…
Wild west frontier? Sure is…!
Oh – and, not an accusation, just curiosity – how come Mike Mann (just sold Cruise.co) got to own such a vast array of the very best generics in the .Co extension…?
What exactly was the process that got him all those top names?
Just asking…
@ Mike
It’s totally standard. There are no ‘laws’ governing any of this. Everything is left up to the for-profit entities who control the process, pursuing their own self interests. We like to think that the drop pattern is some universal standard but unfortunately, absent meaningful government intervention, registrars (and their in-bed partners at the domain auction services) will act in their own financial interests. That amounts to ensuring that domains of unusual desirability and value are trafficked their way and sold for their gain.
In a way, you have to give them credit. They amount to the most ambitious and intelligent people in the industry. While everyone else was running around trying to play ‘the game’, they were the ones who realized that the game itself had no rules and they could do whatever they wanted.
FYI, switch.net already hit with UDRP:
http://www.udrpsearch.com/wipo/d2011-1774
Voltaire…he bought them before the relaunch. .co is not a new extension.
“…he bought them before the relaunch. .co is not a new extension….”
Okay…Thanks, Tim.
both UTT.com and TTT.net sounds like a typosquatting of the ITT domain/site/company