How Valuable will 4 letter domain names be . . .

[ultranet]

Hello to all

It is predicted that by i think fall of 07 they will all be registered (cant find the site I read it on . . .I tried sorry).

Anyway, it mentioned that pronouncable 4 letter .coms are pretty much all taken.

Nowadays most domains are stuf like qgjf.com fvrt.com etc.

How valuable will these things be once all 4 letter domain names are taken? I've seen many auctions at SP where people aren't even biting at these domains.

So is there value overinflated or is it that once all the 4 letter domains are taken the value for these things will shoot up?

Thanks for your time

[MattEvans]

The domain 'fvrt.com' might be useful to the 'Flooberry Vertigo Radish Troopers Inc.' but to anyone else it's pretty much worthless.

If there's no brand or company identity associated with an acronym, it's very unlikely that even a company whos name or brand could fit a non-pronouncable acronym would have any particular interest in that domain name...

For example, the aforementioned fictional group may be more interested in a 'regularly priced' domain 'flooberytroopers.com' than an auctioned domain that's an acronym for the groups registered trading name.

Demand is the issue really.

[roryt]

Like Matt said they are only gonna be worth money if you managed to get something like wait.com or what.com not just random letters. You might make a few dollars but if you want to make hundreds or thousands you are better off looking for longer domains that might actually mean something to someone.

However, luckily for you the first one of those domains has still not been taken!!!;)

[cpickering]

Lots of spamtrap/searching site companies purchased a lot of 4 letter random letter domains, just basically so they could own them, and sell them later on when they are worth something.

[roryt]

The story of every ebayers life. I would love to be able of though of something like XBOX.com or something that is incredibly mainstream now but was once probably never even though of. What do you guys think will be the future main domains of the web. (dont worry Im not gonna buy them)

[cpickering]

The story of every ebayers life. I would love to be able of though of something like XBOX.com or something that is incredibly mainstream now but was once probably never even though of. What do you guys think will be the future main domains of the web. (dont worry Im not gonna buy them)

M$ would have tapped you up for that domain, claiming it was their idea since the birth of christ and before. Money wins; again.

Mike Rowe springs to mind. M$ threatened to take him to court simply because he had a domain, that was his name and was similar to M$; MikeRoweSoft.com

[roryt]

Mike Rowe springs to mind. M$ threatened to take him to court simply because he had a domain, that was his name and was similar to M$; MikeRoweSoft.com

Yes, I remember that. Oh boy how much i hate microsoft. That site isn't even in use they could atleast point it to their proper site.:mad:

[jwenting]

domain squatting and domain hijacking are despicable and often criminal activities.
Anyone involved in them should (and often is) sued to hell and back and ordered to hand over the good while paying compensation to the people they tried to defraud.

[roryt]

There is no crime if you just find a domain that you think might be used for a product that hasn't been made yet. I know there isn't much chance of you guessing one and I for one don't have the money to spend one hundreds of domains. I was just trying to see what other people could be popular domains in future that aren't owned at the mo. I had absolutely no intention of going and buying them. No illegal activity here don't worry ;)

[jwenting]

holding companies hostage until they pay millions for a domain however is becoming ever more common.
More than one case had domain squatters threaten to sell a domain name similar to the name of a company or organisation to a porn site or hate group unless the target company coughed up the cash.
Such practices are becoming ever more common, and make the lowlifes that domain squatters are even less worthy of living.

[roryt]

Do you think that if you own a domain that someone else wants because its their companies or products name you should just give it to them at a normal price?

[MattEvans]

It's all a bit relative really.

There can definately be a legitimate trading of domains that have no real relation to a specific company. An Internet company might chose to name its product or even itself based on the availability of a domain. In that case, there's no moral question involved. The 'nicest' generic names are either in use or in holding, and they'll cost according to their niceness and the amicability of their present owner.

Deliberately buying a domain that's similar to a company name is usually only done to ransom the company, or misdirect and defraud users.

But, whether it's right or wrong to register a similar sounding name to an existing company is a compound question with a compound answer.

A lot of laywers get a lot of money for answering the question everytime it comes up. it's a silly case where so much money gets spent trying to prove that company A is 'emulating' or 'stealing' company B's face, and why they are doing it.

In my eyes, it's legal to buy any domain name, and it's legal to sell any domain name; unless a specific 'real' crime has been comitted (like fraud, slander or murder), it's just bad luck if someone else gets the domain you want, or a domain like yours.

I don't think I'd make much money as an intellectual property lawyer... But I'd consider myself a higer form of life if I was a 'domain squatter' than if I were a lawyer ^_-

[jwenting]

Do you think that if you own a domain that someone else wants because its their companies or products name you should just give it to them at a normal price?

Domain squatters don't just happen to own names, they deliberately register names in order to squeeze money out of others.
If I have a name registered and some years later a company with a similar name comes up and makes me an offer too good to refuse, I take them up on it.

That's not domain squatting, it's normal business, and I'd expect to be compensated for the cost of rebranding my business and possible loss of business because of it.

But I'm not going to buy a thousand domain names that companies just might want to use at some point in the future, put up a "this domain is for sale" notice, and start browsing through the yellow pages looking for companies to extort money from with threats to sell the domain to a child porn distributor.

[roryt]

Neither I am. I had no plans of advising people to squat for domains or buy them myself. Don't worry,

[Mushy-pea]

If someone does pay over the odds to one of these so called domain squatters, its their own fault. A company having a good sounding address for their website can't make up for good business management. Also, some domain suffixes have restrictions imposed on them by the DNS database maintainer, presumably to stop the squatting that has been mentioned here. For example, Nominet UK only allows companies registered in the UK to aquire domains ending with .plc.uk. At the end of the day, the organisations that maintain the DNS services are the only ones that can be expected to regulate the allocation of names.

Steven.

[roryt]

For example, Nominet UK only allows companies registered in the UK to aquire domains ending with .plc.uk. At the end of the day, the organisations that maintain the DNS services are the only ones that can be expected to regulate the allocation of names

Yeah, i think this is also true for .ltd.uk domains, they are restricted to uk limited companies. However most mainstream internet companies go for the .com or .co.uk domain anyway. But yes I also think it is the domain allocators who should take the responsibility of stopping domain "squatters" from buying domains that are clearly going to be wanted by a company in the future.

[MattEvans]

I registered a name on 2 TLDs (I wont mention the name), and the next day a group whos website claims they 'protect .org domains for the good of society' (or something like that) bought up the .org version of the name.

They may or may not be legitimate: .org is supposadly reserved for 'organisations'. Luckily, I wasn't interested in the .org version of the name; if I was, I'm sure they'd have accepted a financial agreement, whatever their legitamacy. o_O

The moral - if you want lots (or all) of the TLDs on a name, buy .org first =P

[Aurongroove]

quick go buy "finalfantasy50.com"

[roryt]

quick go buy "finalfantasy50.com"

Maybe try buying a number slightly closer to the current edition ;) . Video games and other items that have lots o different versions often use just one domain.

[jwenting]

Yeah, i think this is also true for .ltd.uk domains, they are restricted to uk limited companies. However most mainstream internet companies go for the .com or .co.uk domain anyway. But yes I also think it is the domain allocators who should take the responsibility of stopping domain "squatters" from buying domains that are clearly going to be wanted by a company in the future.

That's impossible to do. Domain squatters are companies, so they can buy those domains...
It's cheap and easy to set up a company in most countries, and a fake office in another country is almost as easy (most countries require just a PO box number for you to register as a company).

And how are you going to determine if "some company may want a name in the future"?
And why should individuals be banned from any domain that any company "may want in the future" anyway?
Say I have a common name and want to register that name for myself.
But because it is a common name some company with that name might at some point in the future exist and want it, so according you your proposed rule I would be banned from having that domain. Hardly fair.

[roryt]

That's not what I meant, I meant that if there is a company called flex, they should be able to expect to on something like www.flex-shop.com in the future. I don't want an argument and I do agree with what you are saying in most places.

[jwenting]

sure, and I have a company called "Baker restaurant supplies Ltd", I want the domain baker.com. So you, Jeff Baker, aren't allowed to register that as your personal site, because some company might in the future want that name.

[MattEvans]

I propose as a solution, more high level domain groups!

Or even customized ones:

Can't get your hands on the domain 'http://adobe.com' for your circus troupe's homepage because some backwater company's got it already? Why not get 'http://acrobat.adobe'?!

Every name available for a 30-second free-for-all!

...

It would probably cripple the Internet ^_~

[trombonecrazy]

that would make the internet just a bit harder to use because instead of expecting that most website are theirname.com you would have to start being creative in the address bar... :(

They are bringing in the .xxx domain though for adult content sites, or atleast they were going to.

[Mushy-pea]

That's impossible to do. Domain squatters are companies, so they can buy those domains...
It's cheap and easy to set up a company in most countries, and a fake office in another country is almost as easy (most countries require just a PO box number for you to register as a company).

See here: http://www.names.co.uk/order/domains/suffix.php?suffix=.plc.uk

Steven.