Estately vs ShackPrices
Submit to Digg.com!
June 29th, 2007 by
Jay Westerdal

The value of a good name is everything. When I first met Galen Ward he told me he had started a small web 2.0 startup called Shack Prices.com. My first thought was, “What an Odd name, Does his company give prices for run down houses?”. I think I was rather blunt when I suggested he think up a better domain. His complaint was that there were no good names still available. I responded, “Over course not, if they were good why would they be available.” The trouble with starting a Web 2.0 startup is that the technology should come first but when it comes to a name or brand they should not settle for whatever is left unregistered.
I reviewed ShackPrices and I saw that the interface and functionality was very impressive. Clearly this will be a good company but it is suffering from what us domainers call “Web 2.0 Naming Disease”. A Web 2.0 company just finds any $7 domain name and makes a brand on top of it. Domainers that own generic domains end up making millions on the Web 2.0 guy. Look at the case of Flickr.com. They choose a name that had a missing “E” and the owner of Flicker.com is now reporting that they receive 150K visitors a month now and they just turning down an offer for $700,000. Had Flickr been smart they could have bought the generic Flicker.com domain name for $15,000 to $25,000 a few years ago and now there is a auction that is exceeding $700,000.
Anyway, back to Shack Prices. I think Galen had defended his name to so many people that he became entrenched in the name. It is hard to give up an existing brand and switch over, but after talking with enough people he determined it would be in the best interest of his company and so he started looking around at names. He wanted something really powerful, he contact the owner of a dream name and was told by the owner the domain would cost him $200K. For a two man team with no funding he quickly passed and kept looking. After four or five more attempts he found a name that was reasonably priced. He asked me for some advice on the purchase, he said, “Does it always feel like you are negotiating in a Mexican outdoor flee market when talking to a domain owner.” I explained, “Yes, generally that back and forth negotiation is normal. Just remember the owner can only sell it once.” The negotiation process is generally pretty easy. But the owner always wants the seller to name the first price. If the buyer says, $200, then the owner may not respond because they hear that line all the time on their generic domain name. The better the domain the more fair an offer should be. $200 will insult generic domain owners. I have a friend that will not even respond if the initial offer is lower then $10,000. If a domain is worth $500,000 without even thinking. Don’t even start an offer below $50,000. It is not worth the owners time to halt his life and educate the person making the offer.
To replace ShackPrices, one of Galen’s choices was Estately.com. The owner of the name only wanted a few thousand for the domain and I told Galen that he was actually getting a steal. A one word domain name that is short and sweet are a total steal if you can get them for under $10,000. Upon announcing the name change this two man company has gotten calls from three VC firms. The brand is everything, as ShackPrices they had great technology but their name held them back. Galen pointed out, real estate professionals are hyper focused on reputation and he was getting mixed reviews with the old name. The offline feedback that he was getting suggested people were either negatively polarized with the ShackPrices name or thought the name was fine. Now the feedback is overwhelmingly positive. Great Brand plus Great Technology and I predict this will be a good thing.
Galen is lucky, Aussie.com, recently completed the acquisition of the domain name Hot Property.com for $120,000. I think the the Estately.com domain is a great brand.
Posted in Domain Sales |
11 Comments »
Domain registration patterns can tell a lot about the world and what news is breaking. The number of IPhone domains skyrocketed on January 11th 2007 when the official announcement came out from Apple. 453 domains with the word “Iphone” were registered that first day and the explosion of Iphone domain names have been steady since that day. The initial spike was a lot of people going after domains so they could have the best domain for marketing purposes.

ICANN just announced to Registrars in San Juan about 5 minutes ago that they will be lowering their fees to $0.20 cents per domain starting July 1st. The preliminary budget will be posted later this week, but here’s the scoop. The current rate is $0.22 cents and the previous year it was $0.25. The delay from when a registrant actually sees this fee being lowered can lag a lot. Once the budget is officially approved, the Registrars can bank on the lower fees and start charging it to their customers accordingly. The Finance committee has approved the fee reduction so it is more official than not. Kurt Pritz, Senior Vice President of ICANN, has said that once the finance committee makes its recommendation it does not need board approval for the fee, however the overall budget still must be officially voted on and pass. But at this time we are expecting the budget to be voted on and also to pass. Earlier this year we saw GoDaddy refund $0.03 on all domains that were registered during the previous cycle because they were invoiced a few months after the change.
Marilyn Cade did the most injustice to the whole debate. Her presentation was about Unethical Domain Parking and not Domain Tasting. She was basically saying that parking pages are the sickness of the Internet. Here is a quote from Marilyn:
The 16 huge names that sold for over $100,000 at the auction this week represent $8,030,000. The other 99 domains represent about $2 million dollars in sales. We see the 80/20 rule come out in full force here. 20% of the domains were huge and made up 80% revenue. Then the remaining 80% of the domains made up the remaining 20% of the revenue. This 80/20 rule generally happens in all businesses. If you don’t know what your 80/20 is then take a look around. On other news I was shocked that Seniors.com sold but I want to congratulate Page Howe. I think he got an Excellent price for this domain! I also think Charters.com for $140,000 was the best buy of the whole auction. It was cheap in comparison to everything else and I think is the best domain per dollar spent.
A new lawsuit has been filed in the Northern District Court of Illinois by Vulcan Golf against the following companies: Google, Inc. Oversee.net, Sedo LLC, Dotster, Internet REIT, and John Does 1 through 10. The Civil Docket for the case is number 1:07-cv-03371. The demand is for $1,000,000 and it cites Trademark Infringement (15:1051). The case was filed on the 15th of this month and the nature of the suit was “470 Racketeer/Corrupt Organization”. The documents for the case were not available because they are said to be not legible however one could obtain those documents directly from the clerk’s office by calling 312-435-5699 during normal business hours.

A lot of people have been emailing me or telling me directly that they had a very deep fear that there was shill bidding going on at the Moniker New York Domain Auction. I asked them to explain why they thought this was the case. It is an extremely serious claim because not only would it be unethical it would be very illegal. I caution anyone from making that claim and would tell them to be careful. Why would someone want to shill bid all the big ticket domains in the auction? There really is not a good reason that I can think of to do that. Perhaps a joker that knew the reserves and thought it would be cute to bid below the reserve. However Monte Cahn is a smart man and I am sure he would spot that so it would be dangerous for a joker to do something illegal like that and be permanently banned from the conferences and auctions. That person would be treated extremely bad by domainers in this close knit industry. I know moniker video taped the entire thing, perhaps they can run the tapes and see who the high bidders were that never got domains. I know that if my reserve was $5 Million and someone bid $4.5 Million I might be convinced to meet them in the middle or lower my reserve on the spot. Everyone knows each other and people talk, something like this would not be a good idea to do infront of a room full of extremely smart people. So therefor I have to dismiss the theory as highly unlikely. But the data is very compelling just on its own. We can see that every $5 million dollar reserve domain got a $4.5MM bid. There was an astonishing $54,222,500 amount bid on domains that did not sell because the reserve price was too high.
Changes on the Management page of