Dave Slutzkin (who is a member here) has written an interesting article about what domains are most marketable these days.
As we all know, the Internet is a rapidly changing business environment and the market for domains is no exception. The traditional way to decide on the value of a domain was that it had to tick certain boxes. It should be short, memorable, pass the radio test, and be relevant to the subject of the site, and a .com is the best.
Then EMDs became very popular - until a G algo change slapped them. Many of us believe(d) that length was important too, as was age. Some of Dave's research seems to suggest otherwise.
Source: article linked to above.From this small sample, it seems that a domain’s length isn’t as important as its specificity to a topic. This might explain why the oldest domain we looked at sold for the lowest price—of all the auctions we considered, it’s the most generic.
Of course, the small sample prevents us from drawing any firm conclusions about the data, but the article is worth a read anyway. It provides food for thought about several attributes of marketable domains. It raises a lot of questions for me, which I think are worth exploring further. For example, how important are the following:
- age of domain
- length
- how specific it is
- generics
- TLD
I'm quite curious about all this because I have a good generic on the .co (sadly, not the .com) and I also have several reasonably old domains. Could they be considered to be in the most marketable category? What's your take on it? What do you think makes a domain most marketable?
Bookmarks