user avatar
Nat Cohen
@domainarts
Owner, Telepathy, Inc. ICA Board member (@ICADomains). Focus on ICANN policy, UDRP, and the domain industry. Also #RankedChoiceVoting and randomness...
Joined September 2011
Posts
  • user avatar
    Domain investing is challenging. Money goes out, but rarely comes back in. -win domain name at auction - pay auction house. -renew domain names - pay registrar/registry -sell 1% or 2% of your domain names - pay commission to marketplace. Pick your domain names carefully....
  • user avatar
    It's not that my asking price is too high, it's that your vision is too small. #domains
  • user avatar
    Telepathy has now sold to Microsoft (GHE.com), Google (Alphabet) (Verily.com, CRR.com), Apple (through its acquisition of Chomp.com), AOL (YGM.com), Facebook (Scaler.com), among other big cos.
  • user avatar
    Medida.com - registered April 4, 1998, sold today, 22 years later. Some seeds take longer than others to ripen. #domains
  • user avatar
    It's rare, in the absence of outbound, to have two companies seriously interested in the same domain name at the same time. It happened recently. One company called the asking price "clearly a scam". The other one paid it. The buyer secured its ideal lifetime brand forever.
  • user avatar
    Not every investment is a winner. Bought golfequipment.org from another domain investor in 2011 for $800. As an experiment, listed it in a no-reserve GoDaddy auction. Net proceeds: $5
  • user avatar
    Congrats @MichaelCyger on being recognized by your industry colleagues with the @ICAdomains Lonnie Borck Memorial Award for your extraordinary contributions to the domain name industry!
  • user avatar
    It is now the official position of the U.S. Government that generic domain names offer huge benefits to companies. Arguing before the Supreme Court in the Booking*com case, the U.S. cites the "huge" "first mover advantages of using a generic [domain] name" c-span.org/video/standalo…
  • user avatar
    My recent domain acquisitions were long held by end-users and first registered between 1993-1996. Most premium domains were first registered 25 yrs ago or more. Many of the original owners are ready to retire or their businesses have been sold. These domains are turning over now.
  • user avatar
    $105k final bid for Alcove(.)com shows just how scarce and desirable high-quality one-word dot-com domain names are. A three-way bidding war between competing domain investors extended the close of the auction by over an hour. #domains
    Replying to @domainarts
    It is also leading some domain investors to be willing to pay very high prices for the highest quality domain names - prices that would have been unthinkable a few years ago - as those most desirable domain names are now recognized by companies as being exceedingly valuable. /15
  • user avatar
    Congratulations to all this year's deserving nominees for the @ICADomains Lonnie Borck Memorial Award - Andrew Rosener @andrewrosener, Bob Hawkes, @AGreatDomain, Elliot Silver @DInvesting, Gerald Levine @gmlevine, (cont...) internetcommerce.org/blog/2024-lonn…
  • user avatar
    Brilliant #UDRP response by Ehren Schaiberger (@megadomains) who successfully defends his domain name thehypecompany.com. The company who brought the complaint is probably wishing that they had just paid the $3,449 asking price. wipo.int/amc/en/domains…
  • user avatar
    I sympathize with mid-size companies seeking to acquire a premium domain name. Even if they stretch to make the maximum possible offer, it often still can't compete with what a larger company can offer. Their desired domain name remains always out of reach. /1
  • user avatar
    Breyer: "The owner of a generic domain name enjoys these benefits... because she was fortunate (or savvy) enough to be the first to appropriate a particularly valuable piece of online real estate." Of course, perhaps she acquired it rather than being the first to register it.
    Even the *dissent* in the Booking(.)com decision talks about the huge advantages of generic domain names. 😀 See page 28 of the PDF (numbered as page 11 of the dissent). supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf…