Subscribe to RSS Feed

08|21|2012 02:50 pm EDT

Freshbooks becomes Cloud Accounting, forgets to buy domain?

by Frank Michlick in Categories: Editorial

Tags: , , , , , ,

Freshbooks just sent out an announcement from their CEO Mike McDerment to their clients – which include my own company (DomainCocoon). The company will become “Cloud Accounting” – there’s just one little snag. The domain is already owned by an accountant in London. Of course he noticed the name change as well.

So here’s the news: from this day forward, FreshBooks is Cloud Accounting. We’ve taken notice of what you are saying and we’re changing the way we talk about ourselves so it is more consistent with how you talk about FreshBooks. We’ve also taken notice of how your needs have changed. And while we have a culture of “show, not tell” at FreshBooks, I will share that our transition to “cloud” will deliver against some of your emerging needs and reinforce the “accounting” component of our evolution.

Read the full announcement here on the Freshbooks blog.

Do you think Freshbooks should have attempted to buy the domain name first? At the moment it appears to be just a tagline (it was “online invoicing” before), but even then, should they not try to do the domain name? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.


Enhanced by Zemanta

10|11|2011 03:59 pm EDT

Verisign domain takedown proposal very worrisome

by Mark Jeftovic in Categories: Editorial, ICANN / Policy

Tags: , , , , , , ,

The following post was originally published on the EasyDNS blog by entrepreneur Mark Jeftovic and was syndicated with his kind permission.
Under a proposed Verisign initiative, all .COM/.NET domains exist at the pleasure of the United States government.

Verisign just released an overview of their proposed “Anti-Abuse Domain Use Policy” Under ICANN’s Registry Services Evaluation Process. The program’s chief aim is to provide a takedown mechanism of malicious websites distributing malware. In itself, not a bad thing, considering some registrars are unresponsive toward abuse or network stability issues.

However, lumped in with the conditions under which Verisign can invoke their takedown capabilities are some troubling “add ons”, as quoted below:

The new anti-abuse policy, would be implemented though a change to the .com. ,net and .name Registry Registrar Agreements and would allow the denial, cancellation or transfer of any registration or transaction or the placement of any domain name on registry lock, hold or similar status as necessary:

(a) to protect the integrity, security and stability of the DNS;

(b) to comply with any applicable court orders, laws, government rules or requirements, requests of law enforcement or other governmental or quasi-governmental  agency, or any dispute resolution process;

(c) to avoid any liability, civil or criminal, on the part of Verisign, as well as its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, and employees;

(d) per the terms of the registration agreement,

(e) to respond to or protect against any form of malware (defined to include, without limitation, malicious code or software that might affect the operation of the Internet),

(f) to comply with specifications adopted by any industry group generally recognized as authoritative with respect to the Internet (e.g., RFCs),

(g) to correct mistakes made by Verisign or any Registrar in connection with a domain name registration, or

(h) for the non-payment of fees to Verisign. Verisign also reserves the right to place upon registry lock, hold or similar status a domain name during resolution of a dispute;

The main problem here is Section (b), which let’s Verisign takedown any domain that is inimical toward a government “requirement” or at the “request” of a law enforcement or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency.

What does this mean?

It means domains can be taken down without judicial process and in the absence of any overt network abuse. I refer anybody who thinks the possibility of abuse of this policy is remote to the actions of Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Joe Lieberman,  last December regarding Wikileaks – an entity which has still never been charged with any offence in any jurisdiction and which continues to operate in a perfectly legal manner. (Lieberman called on “any company or organization that is hosting Wikileaks to immediately terminate its relationship with them.” – Which sounds like a “request” to me.)

What Wikileaks did was expose bad actions of the various governments themselves, some of those – illegal. It can be assumed that governments that are acting against the interests of their constituents or committing actual crimes have a “requirement” that everybody shuts up about it. Thus any whistleblower, journalist or egregious truth-teller using a domain under .com or .net to bringing light on issues such as these could find themselves with their domain unplugged under this policy.

In the case of Wikileaks, Lieberman’s staff telephoned various web services providers and demanded that they sever ties and cease providing services.  Next time all they would have to do is call Verisign and tell them that the government “requires” them to takedown their domain. (Of course, Wikileaks is under .org, not .com or .net, but next time it may not be Wikileaks. Maybe it’ll be Zerohedge. Maybe it’ll be easyDNS. Maybe it’ll be you.)

Under the proposed rules, it’s not just the government that could initiate takedowns but even “quasi” governmental agencies. What’s a quasi-governmental agency?  It’s a government created entity that undertakes commercial activities on behalf of the government. That would mean entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation could takedown any .com or .net domain based on having a “requirement” or making a “request” to do so.

Section (c) is also troublesome: providing that Verisign can takedown any domain to avoid liability to themselves. So if other avenues of removing a troublesome domain fail, you could just simply sue, or threaten to sue Versign and they can unplug the underlying domain.

Last year the US Department of Homeland Security (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) began a series of domain takedowns intended to enforce copyright violations. In one case they seized a third-level domain provider ( which resulted in the takedown of over 84,000 unrelated and innocent websites.

Since the ICE takedowns were arbitrary and widening in scope, there became a perceived benefit to using non-US based Registrars for domain registration, as the takedowns were being implemented via court orders to those US-based registrars.

If this policy goes into effect, there are no safer jurisdictions for any .com or .net domain anywhere in the world. They all come under US government, quasi-governmental and law enforcement agency “requirements”.

The Verisign proposal concedes that:

Registrants may be concerned about an improper takedown of a legitimate website.  Verisign will be offering a protest procedure to support restoring a domain name to the zone.

Which is not very comforting. What is the “protest procedure” and how long will it take? Will a contested takedown put the domain in an online or offline state while the procedure is implemented, and how long does that take?

Proposed Modifications

If this is to move forward, our recommendations are as follows:

  • Section b should be stricken, and the current model that government inspired domain takedowns be requested via the Registrar of record be retained.
  • In cases of court-ordered takedowns, Verisign should only intercede in the case of a non-responsive Registrar and again, under a court order.
  • Section c should be stricken. Verisign already insulates itself from liability in its Agreements with Registrars and under the various Registrant Agreements already in place. This should not be a back-door method into taking down a domain.
  • If a Registrar feels a false-positive takedown has occurred, there needs to be a mechanism to bring the domain back online immediately pending the outcome of a challenge or disputed takedown.

Editorial Add-on by Frank Michlick

I completely agree with the comments by Mark, but I’d like to one step further and comment on the plan to pro-actively scan the domain registration base for malware sites as highlighted in the Domain Name Wire article on the same topic. While I am not a lawyer, I think it is very dangerous grounds for a registry operator to start actively monitoring registered domain names for their content and its compliance with laws. Once a registry does this as a pro-active service, it could imply that the registry becomes liable for sites that it misses in its scans, since it should be aware of the content of the sites for the domains registered through them. I think that a registry should act as a technology provider and facilitator the registry should not be active in developing the policy that decides what is illegal and what isn’t.

08|05|2011 12:27 pm EDT

Who Will Be The Big Winners and Losers of the New TLDs?

by Mark Jeftovic in Categories: Editorial

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

We’d like to welcome Mark Jeftovic as a guest author. In the domaining world he’s known for stirring up some controversy in the past. Mark lives in Toronto, Canada with his wife and daughter, he’s the founder and president of – the DNS hosting provider & domain name registrar, a libertarian and former Director to the Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA).

When one looks at the track record of introducing new Top Level Domains it is perplexing to see where all the enthusiasm around unlimited new TLDs comes from. So far every attempt to roll one out owes it’s sustenance to purely defensive registrations (.biz, .info) or else it’s degraded into an utter fracas (.jobs) or just plain flopped (.pro)

The latest TLD that isn’t a country code tarting itself up as a pseudo-generic is probably a good indicator of what to expect going forward: .xxx – reviled by the industry it extorts , err, purports to serve and first new TLD that we are seriously considering making a conscious decision not to “grab our name before somebody else does!”. I’m certain it won’t be the last. I believe one of the first things we will see as all this unfolds is a buyers strike in defensive regs. Once that happens everything will go sideways.

So despite the near frenzied hype around these things, I have already gone on record to predict failure for the vast majority of them.

The forthcoming onslaught of TLDs can be divided into roughly three categories:

1. Generics: these are where “the next .com”‘ TLDs will position themselves. Most will fail because there will be a buyers strike in defensive registrations and the speculators will get crushed. None of them will ever become “bigger than .com”, and I’ll be surprised if one ever catches up with .net.

2. Specifics: these are TLDs which exist for a reason (which I’ve been calling for), but that reason is just a thin premise based on naming. .jobs is a great example of this, because quite frankly, the premise was dumb. That companies would go out and register the .jobs version of their names to post job openings, as opposed to just adding /jobs onto their URL was weak from the outset. There are a lot of these in the pipe: .music, .eco, .money whatever – the ostensible reason for the existence of the TLD is to be the apex of some category vertical. What
I’ve found over the years in this business is that people tend to not order themselves into the categories you set up for them. Once again, the only thing that will hold these TLDs up are defensive registrations and speculators (who will get crushed).

3. Brands: this is where some entity with deep pockets sets its own TLD up to prove that “they’re serious” about their brand. So if Paul McCartney created .beatles and the only 4 domains under it were john, paul, george and ringo, it would be an example of a brand TLD. It would also provide zero value to the brand and probably even fail as call-to-action URLs as people habitually keep adding “.com” onto the end of everything when they type it into a browser location bar.

Still, we cannot stand in the way of .progress, this evolution is inevitable, and I think necessary. This is who I think the big winners and bigger losers will be…because as per usual, the consensus projections for where this is all going are the outcomes that are likely precluded from occurring.

See the losers and winners of the new TLDs after the jump.

Let’s start with THE LOSERS

Business Owners: people who run businesses on the web, or businesses with a web presence will be expected to pony up for non-refundable sunrise claims and landrush pre-orders, at jacked up prices and inflated
minimum terms, all to defend their names. This may work when it happens once a year or so, but anybody who expects to keep working when brand owners get hit with this 10, 20 or 100 times a year better rethink that
calculus. Because I don’t think it will. What is more likely to happen is they decide to just start suing the squatters as they surface, and it will probably culminate in some legal action against the registries themselves, possibly in the form of class actions.

Brand Owners: This hoopla around .brand is stupid. You probably don’t give a crap about your breakfast cereal’s twitter feed. You think it needs it’s own TLD? There are very few brands that make any sense as a
TLD. Something like .Mac comes to mind, but they are an exception. Whatever brand you own, probably isn’t. Don’t waste your money.

Investors: As I’ve posited, most new TLDs will fail. Once the defensive-name buyers’ strike kicks in, most of the new TLDs will not even make it past that initial cashgrab phase which makes them look so lucrative. Couple that with an abysmal renewal cycle as the speculators realize that nobody wants to pony up xxx,xxx for “”, and you have a recipe for epic value destruction. (Memo to VC’s: you can use this as a filter: anything you are pitched that contains a slide that says “and then we get our own TLD”, you can just move onto the
next prospect.)

Programmers / Network Engineers / Operators: Will find their jobs become ever more vexing once it becomes impossible to encapsulate the known universe of top-level namespaces and their syntax rules in a usable
format. Think about the present-day intractable problem of trying to create a bulletproof regex for a valid email address and amp up the complexity from there. This will cause all kinds of bugs and usability issues, but hey, that’s why those guys get paid the big bucks.

But it won’t be all bad news, these losers will have their gizards eaten by…


TLD & Registry Providers: When there’s a gold rush on, the people selling picks and shovels make out like bandits. Companies that enable and provide infrastructure to Top Level Domain operators will probably
have an initial wave of success.

DNS Providers: At the end of the day, it’s all just names-to-numbers and for that you need DNS. To run a TLD you would need at least a modicum of global redundancy, preferably anycast deployed and able to withstand DOS attacks. Enter the DNS providers, because they’re the ones who have those capabilities. (Do I have to disclose that I run one at this point? I don’t expect a flood of new TLD applicants to be banging down my door to handle their rootzone DNS).

Dispute Resolution Providers: will enjoy a booming business. As the buyers strike gathers steam, companies will find it is cheaper to “take out” an offending name in an unfashionable TLD than trying to defend
their name in all of them at exorbitant sunrise rates.

Domain Litigation Lawyers: Not only will there be an endless selection of second-level squatters to sue, they can form class actions and snuff out entire registries deemed to have egregious disregard for the IP
rights of others. For them it will be a Golden Age of prosperity.

and finally, the single biggest, winningest winner of them all…..

ICANN: They run the golden goose, they collect the $185,000 per successful application, they get to keep the non-refundable portion of the application fee from all the losers and then the $25,000 in annual
fees per TLD, Nice work if you can get it.

Beyond that, everything I’ve been saying about the new TLDs hinges around this concept: that the days of “register your name under .etc, before somebody else does” are over. I expect out of the first 100 or so TLDs, maybe 1 or 2 will initially do something outside-the-box, something that will change the game and actually add value at the root level.

I don’t know what that is yet, but those are the new TLDs that will succeed, while the rest crap out. Off the top of my head, something different, like maybe .gps, where domains under .gps actually represent GPS coordinates and thus real world locations; or .rfid where domains under that root would carry meta-data about RFID tagged items such as location or status. Who knows. But it will go far beyond that “”.

Those new TLDs will be the signal, everything else will be noise.

05|04|2011 09:54 am EDT

Who Shares Your Address

by Frank Michlick in Categories: Editorial

Tags: , , , , , ,

Or: How to find other domainers in your home town

Like many domain owners I use a PO Box (in a UPS store in my case) as a whois address. While it’s not particularly hard to locate me, I do this for a number of reasons. For one, I do not want my home address listed everywhere. Another reason is that I may not always be home, but may still need access to my mail. If your PO Box is in a store and you have been a customer for a while, you can usually ask them for

Ultimately I would love to get even closer to being “paperless” and use a service like Earth Class Mail that scans your mails and can even deposit checks for you, but I have yet to find something like that in Canada – anyways, back on topic.

Yesterday I attended one of the startup community events here in Montreal – something like DemoCamp that went by the name of Montreal NewTech. Basically the event gives people a chance to demo their product or an early prototype of their product and gather some questions & feedback from the community. To make a long story short, one of the demos I saw lead me to look up a domain name related to one of the presentations I saw – and lo and behold the domain owner has his PO Box in the same location as I do.

I remembered seeing someone else using the same store as a whois address (obviously with a different box number), so I got curious and wanted to know if there are any other like-minded people using the same store. A quick search on Google “123 business st” revealed that there are at least seven(!) other people with more than 25 domains that own mailboxes in the same store (and a number of small businesses using a PO box as their whois address). I think send the people with 25+ names a note this week and invite them to next week’s DomainConvergence conference.

This kinda reminded me how back in the late 80s and early 90s I used a PO box in Germany to swap computer demos (= computer art) with other people all around the world. I got ended up running into someone who also picked up envelopes that curiously looks like they contained 5 1/4″ diskettes, so I approached them and found out that they were part of the “computer scene” as well – a friendship ensued.

02|08|2010 12:05 pm EDT

Google Ad Gets Lots of Love and Godaddy Jumps the Shark with Super Bowl Ads

by Adam Strong in Categories: Editorial

Tags: , , , , ,

Now that the Super Bowl game’s “Brand Bowl” is finished, the polls and opinions are popping up everywhere. This year there seems to be a lot more  reactions and buzz bubbling on the internet, more so than in year’s past, thanks in part to social media sites.

Who had the cleverest ads? Who was the funniest?  Facebook, Youtube and Twitter (and maybe even a few old-school water coolers) will be buzzing the rest of today with chatter about both an amazing game and some good and some not so good ads.  Youtube’s voting is still going on and you can catch all the ads that you missed. There were some good ones that got a little chuckle from me, but generally speaking the creative wasn’t outstanding. The companies that advertised on the game and matter most in this little “domain world” were Google and Godaddy. . . (more…)

11|04|2009 05:09 pm EDT

SnapNames Insider Bidding Aftermath – EDITORIAL

by Adam Strong in Categories: Editorial

Tags: , , , , , ,

When I read the news today from Oversee and SnapNames stating that an employee had been bidding on domains, I knew. . . I knew who it was. I didn’t want to hear it but I knew. Like many of my colleagues who frequented SnapNames auctions over the years, the first name that came to mind was “Halvarez” .  To confirm from SnapNames sources later that it was indeed Nelson Brady really was more disheartening.

For those that never worked directly with SnapNames or Nelson, he was the kind of guy that you could email day or night and he’d respond almost instantaneously. He was the kind of guy that you wanted working on the other end of the phone; fast, courteous and intelligent.  To find out now that he was lying and betraying not only me, but everyone that he worked with leaves me speechless.  It left a fellow employee I spoke with at SnapNames speechless as well.  With such a small organization, I can only imagine the feeling of betrayal.

This is a tough day for Oversee. The aftermath of this news will leave a cloud of doubt over SnapNames for years to come.  This isn’t the only problem that this issue created though. Every Tom, Dick and Harry with a conspiracy theory about any domain company will come out of the woodwork now claiming “I told you so” or bringing up more cases of strange behavior that they believe could only be attributed to a nefarious company or individual.

We’re already seeing new theories today with posts in DNN comments citing other SnapNames users such as “Vaxis” may have also shills (most insiders know this was Kevin Ham’s user name).   Other conspiracies popping up include that the company knew about this and Brady is being thrown under the bus. The domain business has always had an unusually high amount of conspiracy theorists, but a conspiracy being proven true is harmful enough to beginning casting a shadow of doubt big enough to cover all in the domain industry.

Take the quote from Michael Arrington, former CEO of (another expiring name aftermarket with conspiracy rumors of their own) comment on the Tech Crunch coverage of the SnapNames story :

Anyone who doesn’t know how dirty the domain name business is just doesn’t know the domain name business.

Arrington has taken plenty of stabs at the domain space since his departure, calling ICANN corrupt and domainers equivalent to the mafia.  This time though the dirty laundry is out and you’d have to say his name calling seems justifiable. Arrington’s mainstream audience which likely knows little about domains now gets to read about the confirmation of how dirty it can be and how right Michael can be as well.

The domain aftermarket business needs to take a step back and really think about the things that went haywire here and what exactly should be done.  SnapNames had internal policies prohibiting this (as do other auction houses), but the reality is that no internal policy is going to keep a rogue employee with dollar signs in their eyes from going after that “golden goose”.  Employees at domain aftermaket and parking companies deal with multi-millionaire clients and I’m sure the lure of the easy buck is hard to resist.  If someone wants to bid on domains and the policy says they can’t, they’ll find a way around it.   Policies like this won’t prevent it, they’ll just slow the person down or create a situation where the employee becomes more “resourceful” and goes further “underground”.

It’s not hard for any employee to create a new identity and run everything through that identity or hire someone to bid on domains on your behalf ?  This becomes an extremely difficult policy for a company to enforce, but clearly one that needs to be addressed.  We’re relying on the company to police itself in these cases.  It took Oversee over 4 years to figure this out so what does that say about policing their own company

The industry needs to get a grip on this stuff . We need a code of conduct, outside audits or some sort of layer of trust built in to these auctions.  The accusations of shill bidding are not new. Every auction house has been accused of it before.  Now it’s real.  We need audits and policies that insure that everything is being run right.  If we don’t I think you can rest assured that someone else will step in and create rules for us or settle these issues with lawsuits.

Let’s get it together domain companies!

10|10|2009 01:07 pm EDT

Privacy Protection for .CA Domain Names Kills Business for Domainers

by Zak Muscovitch in Categories: Editorial

Tags: , , , , ,

Guest contributor Zak Muscovitch is a domain name lawyer, based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He has been practising domain name law for ten years. Go to and

Privacy Protection for domainers who have legitimate portfolios is a little like a burka on a bikini model.

Although keeping one’s domain name registration details private is an attractive concept and may even help wary registrants avoid imparting too much information to prospective domain name dispute claimants, in my humble opinion, the practice is a business killer in the .CA realm. As a domain name lawyer I can rarely find out who owns what to try and put together deals. I can’t trace the history of domains to perform due diligence. I can’t identify connections between web sites and domain owners. It stymies me. And if it stymies me from doing .CA deals, that means that it is hurting business for .CA owners , who dont need any more negative factors affecting the Canadian market than they already have. Sure I can sometimes use other methods, but the utility of whois archives is lessening as time goes on, because it carries no new information for most .ca’s since all recent records are privacy protected.

By way of background, CIRA, the Canadian Internet Registration Authority made privacy protection a “default setting” [ed. for individual registrants], and considered this move a leadership position in the Internet world. And I did too. I am a big fan of privacy and thought that CIRA’s privacy protection policy was extraordinarily progressive and consumer-friendly. But I was wrong. It kills business. Imagine a stock exchange where there are no listings….That is what has happened here. And the benefit of privacy is nil for a domainer who is trying to hide, because there a CDRP [ed:.CA Dispute Resolution Policy] reveals your identity anhow….and hiding can actually encourage a CDRP…So it gets you nowhere other than to avoid someone like me finding out what domain name you own so I can easily contact you and know who you are, to make a deal.

In the Canadian .CA realm, domains are extraordinarily underdeveloped so we need all the contact and attention that we can get – not privacy! We dont want a marketplace with hidden vendors. We want a marketplace with vendors showing their wares off in public and making themselves available to bargain with each other.

10|09|2009 11:21 pm EDT Sells for $16 Million

by Frank Michlick in Categories: Domain Sales, Editorial


Elliot Silver has been digging through the filings on the NASDAQ stock exchange and noticed that (NSDQ:NSUR) has sold their domain name and company name for $16 million USD. The company will rebrand to “Life Quotes”. They originally paid $1,600,000 for the domain name in 2001. If this had been the domain name only this could have been a one of a kind record sale, but according to, the sale included “related media assets”, which have yet to be explained in more detail.

The buyer was QuinStreet, the company that also is still in the process of buying from WebMediaBrands (NSQ:WEBM).

Phil Perillo, CFO [ed. of], remarked, “This transaction, which calls for a $15 million cash payment now and a $1.0 million payment in 365 days, significantly increases our shareholders’ equity and stockpile of cash. As a result of this asset sale, the Company now has approximately $24 million of cash and investments, no debt, stockholders’ equity of $31.4 million and a book value of approximately $4.98 per share.”

Read the full press release after the jump.


07|22|2009 08:01 am EDT

.CM Auctions and Typo Traffic – What Are These Domains Really Worth?

by Chad Kettner in Categories: Editorial

Tags: , , , , ,

Every domainer has heard the story of how Kevin Ham built a $300 million empire – particularly how he profited from the millions of people who accidentally type “.cm” (the country code TLD for Cameroon) instead of “.com” when searching for a website.

And now that Cameroon’s ccTLD registrations are open to the public, domain auction houses are targeting domainers and typosquaters alike in an effort to sell high-end generic .CM domains for hefty prices.

In Rick Latona’s premium .CM auction, which ended July 14, some of the most sought after .CM domains such as,, and were sold for prices ranging between $5,000 to $35,500. And beyond that, the registration fees for .CM domains are expected to start around $350 for 2 years.

So were these domains worth it? And are other .CM domains worth registering? I say no, and here are two reasons why:

.CM Is Intended For TLD Typosquatters

While generic keyword-based domain names will always have SEO benefits, there’s no getting around the fact that .CM domains are meant for TLD typosquatters (unless you own a business in Cameroon). Only 2-4% of Cameroon’s population has Internet access and with registration fees estimated to be around $175/year, there are many cheaper alternatives for domainers who want legitimate keyword-based URLs. So unless you are intending to benefit from TLD typosquatting, there’s no use in owning a .CM domain.

But what’s worse is that NameJet isn’t even trying to hide that fact. The official NameJet .CM domain order page is advertising trademark infringing domains such as,,, and as “Popular .CM Preorders”, and openly listing two of the main benefits of owning a .CM domain as “securing natural traffic to your site” and “protecting your brand to avoid any misleading uses of your name”.

On the flip side, they might as well point out that the benefits could also include “taking natural traffic away from the intended site” and “infringing on another brand by misleading Internet users with an almost-exact domain”.

The Revenue Won’t Be As Much As You Think

After hearing about the success Kevin Ham had with .CM domains, some might think that .CM is a sure-fire approach to making money online. Besides, much like 2006/2007  there are still millions of people accidentally typing in “.cm” instead of “.com” periodically – and it’s perfectly legal to own .CM domains as long as they’re not infringing on any trademarks.

Even so, Kevin Ham had almost every .CM domain putting pennies in his pocket. Unfortunately, even the richest domainers targeting .CM would be lucky to grab a couple hundred premium generic domains at a cost of $175/year for registration fees. And at this price it would be tough math to figure out how much traffic the domain will receive, how much revenue it can generate, and whether or not would be profitable over time. Plus, keep in mind that PPC revenue is down and the best generic domains will come at a cost as they’ll only be available by auction.

Word is that there are quite a few previous owners of premium .CM domains that were disappointed with the results. Take it for what it’s worth.

That’s my two cents…what do you think? Are you going to be going for any .CM domains?

06|04|2009 09:15 am EDT

Targeted TRAFFIC ccTLDs 2009 Live Auction Results

by Frank Michlick in Categories: Domain Auction, Editorial

Tags: , , , , , ,

We will be were live blogging the auction results of the auctions at the Targeted TRAFFIC ccTLDS in Amsterdam for the Auction. As always we do not guarantee the accuracy of these results. Unsold names will be included in the Extended Silent Auction, which goes until June 11.

You can see the results after the jump. (more…)