Showing posts with label GoValue. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GoValue. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 11, 2018

GoValue Accuracy for CO Domain Names


In an earlier post I analyzed how effectively GoDaddy automated GoValue system estimated the worth of NNNNN.com domain names. This time I looked at the same question, but for a set of CO extension domain names that sold in the summer 2018 Sedo premium CO domain auction. 


The Data


Sedo had a summer 2018 auction for premium .CO domain names. This provided a dataset that all sold at the same  time and venue, and the auction format contributes to each domain sale being reflective of true worth.

When the auction results were announced at the beginning of August 2018 I immediately checked the GoValue estimates for each CO domain that sold in the auction.  This is important to reduce chance of GoValue estimates were adjusted in response  to the sales.

What I found is in the table (click on table for a higher resolution view).  For each domain name sold I give the domain name, the actual auction sales price, and the GoDaddy GoValue estimate of worth.  I also compute for each the ratio of the two values – for example if the domain had a GoValue estimate of $16,000 while it sold for $8000 the ratio would be 2.


Analysis


At the bottom of the table are the average and standard deviation of each column. For this dataset the sales price averaged $3475 while the average of GoValue estimates of worth is $8221  Therefore, GoValue, for these domains, suggested higher valuations than the actual sales prices by about a factor of 2.4.

The individual values are plotted in the graph. I did regressions comparing sales prices with automated worth estimates.  I tried various functional forms (linear, polynomial, logarithmic, exponential) for the regression, with exponential providing the best fit to the data. The correlation is moderately good, with R2=0.50. An R2 value of 1.00 means perfectly correlated data, while 0.00 would mean no correlation at all.

If desired, this graph could be used to predict likely actual sales prices from automated estimates of worth.  For example, if the GoValue estimate of worth of a CO domain name is $10,000, the likely sales price is approximately $4,500.

If we look at individual values, GoValue did correctly predict the lowest price domain name (formulas).  On the upper end, GoValue did not do as well, predicting that the names debt, card and holiday would fetch the highest sales prices. In terms of actual sales prices Vegas, hire and weather  had the highest values. In a bit less than half the cases the predicted and actual sales prices are within a factor of two of each other.


Conclusions


It might be expected that CO domain names are, after COM and NET, among the easiest to predict as there is a fair volume of sales data history. However, it could be argued that single word domain names are more challenging to predict than numbered domain names.

While the average worth estimates from GoValue are inflated when compared to actual sales prices for these CO domain names,  there is moderate success in predicting which domain names are more valuable. If we compare this analysis to the earlier one on NNNNN.com domain names, that study found that average prices for the set were almost spot on, but the regression for which names are more valuable is weak. 

Auctions sometimes produce surprises, as two bidders can drive up the price in some cases beyond likely market levels.  I suspect many domain investors would have predicted that debt and card would have sold for more than weather, in line with the GoValue prediction, even though the sales price turned out to be higher for weather in the actual auction.  A geographic name like Vegas is also challenging to predict.

Overall GoValue provides order of magnitude worth estimates, and some indication of relative worth. It should not be your only source of information on a domain name worth, but is somewhat helpful as one of the measures, at least for CO extension domain names.

Users of the information in this post should keep in mind that it is for a limited dataset and for promoted auction sales at a single venue, Sedo.


Links:


Original post Sept 11, 2018.

Disclosure:  I currently hold a number of CO domain names, but none that were in this auction. I am  not associated with NameBio, but would like to acknowledge their incredible database and their generosity to make it available to the domain community. I have no association with GoDaddy or the GoValue automated estimate of worth tool, except as a user.

Fine Print

This post is offered for informational and educational purposes only, and should not be considered domain name investment advice. While an attempt has been made to be accurate, there is no implied or explicit warranty, and you are responsible for verifying any information of importance to you. You also accept full responsibility for any domain investing decisions you may make that use data from this post.

I try to be fair, balanced and objective in my analysis.  If you feel this post does not meet that standard, please express your concerns to me.  

In a very few cases there may be affiliate links on this blog. This means I receive a small amount if users visit or make purchases via the link. You do not pay any additional charge due to using an affiliate link, and in some cases your cost will be below the normal price. I receive no identifying information about who clicks, or does not click, any link. I never accept compensation to provide favourable review of any particular service or product.

The text of this posting is ©R Hawkes, all rights reserved. However, you may, without permission, use reasonable length portions of the post as long as a link to this post is also provided. If you wish to use the complete contents of a post, please request permission. I am normally open to reprinting, but will consider each request individually. 

The images used are either those associated with a product or service, my own images, or Pixabay images believed to be available for use without attribution. If you see any image that you believe is problematic, please let us know and we will immediately correct the situation.

Tuesday, August 7, 2018

Prices for .News Domain Package Names Uncovered

History


Donuts announced a  "six figure" price for the sale of a group of platinum .news domain names.  The package contained the domain names cancer.news, climate.news, food.news, health.news, medicine.news, pollution.news and science.news. While originally a false name was used in the announcement of the sale, after research by DomainIncite, it was subsequently disclosed by Donuts that the purchaser was in fact WebSeed, a company founded by Mike Adams. Mike Adams is known as Health Ranger for his previous content at Natural News.

As has been pointed out by others, the actual content on the sites is at best highly questionable. There is certainly not balanced coverage of scientific content on the sites in my opinion.  For example, my examination of the sites reveals frequent anti-vaccine content that has been well debunked by medical and scientific experts, as well as extensive climate change criticism that is contrary to the evidence amassed by respected scientists over decades. The writing on the sites is frequently alarmist and sensationalistic, with strong political undertones.

While the sites may appeal to alternate truth advocates of various conspiracy theories, they certainly do not, in my opinion, provide a scientific view. The Genetic Literacy project looked at the types of information spread by Mike Adams through the complex wet of Natural News sites prior to his move into these domain names.  Fortunately, I think the bias on these sites is so obvious that most will not consider them authoritative information sources.

I have been  able to uncover the prices paid for 5 of the 6 domain names in the package.  I share that information in the next section, along with a look at some comparator sales for reference.

Prices Uncovered


By accident I stumbled across the exact price for one of the domains during a GoValue search looking at a similar name when one of the six names in the package came up as a comparator.  For prices up to $25,000 GoDaddy GoValue show the exact price, while above that they only show >$25,000.  A bit of searching in GoValue quickly revealed the purchase prices for all but one of the domain names (for some reason no price appears for the medicine.news name).  I give that information below.

  • cancer.news $19,167
  • climate.news $19,166
  • food.news $19,166
  • health.news $19,167
  • pollution.news $19,167
  • science.news $19,167

If the medicine.news domain name sold  for $19,166 as well (but see update below), that brings the total price of the six domain package to $115,001, confirming the six figure package price reported in the press release.  As of today, none of the domain names show up on the NameBio sales database. You can see the prices for yourself by going to GoValue and entering one of the names in the search.

UPDATE: I have now done a little more research on the domain name medicine.news trying to figure out why it does not have a price given like the others.  While contact details are hidden under privacy, the ICANN Whois shows that the domain name was first registered on July 10, 2015. It was most recently renewed in July of 2018. I then used the Wayback Machine to confirm that the website has indeed been active since mid 2015, for example this is how it looked in 2016.  While  no contact information or ownership was provided, one of two ads on each page seems to be for a Ranger related item, and the content seems so similar to the sites operating today in tone and coverage, it seems almost certain that Mike Adams has long owned and operated medicine.news.

Now if the domain name medicine.news was not really part of the sales package, despite its inclusion in the press release, then the combined sales price of the other 5 domain names is just $95,835 and the press release description of a package of 6 domain names selling for six figures is inaccurate.  In the first DomainIncite post it was stated "It appears that the same buyer has acquired several other presumably non-platinum .news domains, including vaccines.news, nutrients.news, menshealth.news and emergencymedicine.news."  While these names have been registered, I could not obtain any price information via NameBio or GoValue. The name EmergencyMedicine.news, does resolve to an operating website that is clearly part of the same group as other six sites, full of articles against the scientific and medical 'establishment' and favouring various alternative treatments. My first thought was that this had been purchased as part of the package, and its price pushed the total over the $100,000 mark.  However, an ICANN Whois indicates that name was first registered on July 15, 2015, so it seems that it can't have been part of the package either. Another of the names, vaccines.news, also is operational at a site clearly linked to the others, but again the registry data on ICANN seems to preclude it being part of the current package.  We therefore are left unclear on the total price of the 2017 package deal between Donuts and WebSeed, and indeed how many domain names are in the package. 

Comparator Prices


I think that a premium was paid for these domain names when one compares to previous sales that have been recorded at NameBio.  There have been, not counting these six, 12 sales of .news extension domain names on NameBio with an average price of just over $3700.  Only one of the sales was for more than the prices above, the single letter name i.news sold for $35,000 at Rightside in June of 2016.  All of the other sales are for about 1/10 (or less) of the prices paid for each of the .news names in the package. You can browse the full NameBio comparator list at this link.

GoValue automated estimates of worth for each domain name are a few thousand dollars for each name in the sale.  The highest when I checked was food.news valued at $4100.  It is true that the word food sold in the .club new domain extension for $9000.  I would say that while the prices are on the high side for the six domain names in the package, they are not completely unreasonable.  Clearly names like science.news and health.news are premium domain names and are worth a lot.

If these prices were to be placed on the NameBio sales database they would be placed in 25th place in the highest new domain extension sales so far in 2018.  You can browse the list at this link.

Closing Notes


In researching this article I also had a look at ICANN Whois data, most of which is didacted under privacy.   However, it is interesting to note that the domain names have different registration and  expiry dates, and several are earlier than is implied in some of the press information on the sale.  For example the domain name food.news was registered on Oct. 24, 2017.  I also found it somewhat surprising that multiple years were not registered, as is frequently done for premium digital assets.  The current registrations in fall  of 2018.

The press release discloses that the sales occurred late in 2017, but the announcement was delayed until the sites are fully operational. The six sites are linked, with navigation at the top of each quickly taking you to one of the others.  Some content is also shared across the sites.  The prices paid for the domain names are somewhat high even for these premium names, and it seems that what WebSeed was purchasing, in addition to the memorable domain names, was an attempt to get respect and authority. The press release for the sale says in describing the content at the sites "quality and authenticity are top priorities" but in my humble opinion that is not supported by an objective evaluation of the sites.

At least on the day that I looked on the sites, they contained only a small amount of niche advertising. While the press release says that there will be minimal advertising, an  alternative explanation suggests that the sites are off to a rocky start in terms off broad acceptance. I also evaluated each site using the VisitRank site that gives the popularity of a site depending on web traffic. The sites generally ranked  somewhere in the 3 million to 10 million range. While this is not insignificant, the sites are not yet on the Alexa 1M.  Science news was the most popular of the new sites, at just over 3 million.  When I did a Google search on the words 'science news' (without quotes), at least  here in Canada, the WebSeed site is on page four. By comparison the real science news site, ScienceNews.org, a highly respected nonprofit that has been operating for decades offering high quality information, places about 7000 on VisitRank and on the top of the first page of Google.  I am surprised that the real Science News site does not issue a UDRP challenge for science.news, as it seems clear to me that it results in dilution of the long established name Science News.

While the initial announcement seemed to give momentum to Donuts and the .news extension in particular, the association with websites promoting alternative 'truth' and conspiracy theories (admittedly mixed with occasional snippets of authentic content) will hurt the adoption of the .news extension by many. As was said by DomainIncite "I can’t help but feel that .news has the potential to take a big credibility hit due to the content of these sites." Nevertheless, the registries cannot, and should not, police what content is placed on domain names they sell. From the number and  content of advertisements on the sites when I recently checked, it would appear to me that most understand  the true nature of the sites.

To my knowledge the price information revealed here has not previously been reported.  If in fact it was reported elsewhere, I am happy to give credit to those sites, so please do let me know.

Original post Aug 7, 2018

Update Aug 8, 2018 with additional research on medicine.news added, along with associated uncertainty on what names were  really in the package.  The title was changed slightly to reflect this uncertainty of package price. 

Links:

Original post Aug 7, 2018.


Fine Print

This post is offered for informational and educational purposes only, and should not be considered domain name investment advice. While an attempt has been made to be accurate, there is no implied or explicit warranty, and you are responsible for verifying any information of importance to you.

I try to be fair, balanced and objective in my analysis.  If you feel this post does not meet that standard, please express your concerns to me.  As disclosure, I do have a domain portfolio that is predominantly ngTLD domain names, although I do also own a number of .com, .ca, .co and a few other country code extension domains..

In a few cases there may be affiliate links will on this blog. This means I receive a small amount if users visit or make purchases via the link. You do not pay any additional charge due to using an affiliate link, and in some cases below the normal price. I receive no identifying information about who clicks, or does not click, any link. I never accept compensation to provide favourable review of any particular service or product.

The text of this posting is ©R.L. Hawkes, all rights reserved. However, you may, without permission, use reasonable length portions of the post as long as a link to this post is also provided. If you wish to use the complete contents of a post, please request permission. I am normally open to reprinting, but will consider each request individually. 

The images used are either those associated with a product or service, or Pixabay images believed to be available for use without attribution. If you see any image that you believe is problematic, please let us know and we will immediately correct the situation.

Saturday, July 7, 2018

Should Automated Domain Worth Tools Be Extension Specific?

Automated Domain Worth Estimation


As those who follow my posts on NamePros and elsewhere will know, unlike some domain investors, I do see value, despite their  limitations, in automated domain name appraisal tools such as Estibot and GoDaddy GoValue.  Even though these should never be the only or even primary estimates of worth, I think that domain investors and potential purchasers should know the values for domain names they are considering. Therefore, in most cases I show these values in my listings at NamesThat.win (along with the caveat that values are not static, and potential purchasers should check for the most recent estimates if this information is important to them).

As artificial intelligence, and in particular machine learning, progresses, these automated tools will become even better. I simply do not accept that a human is always better at the task of evaluating the worth of domain names and always will be. Even today Google Maps does a pretty amazing job of finding a good route from point A to point B in a complex city, whether I want to go by walking, public transit, car, or bicycle. Is evaluating a domain name inherently a more complex task? A tool that has access to all of the data on past domain sales, Google searches, etc. is well placed to make a good estimation of domain name value.

As behavioural economists remind us, humans are subject to numerous cognitive biases and blindspots. Yes, I value the opinion of domain name investors, occasionally asking for them on the Appraisal section of NamePros, and not infrequently leaving my opinions for others. But I also place value on objective estimates from automated tools. Both human and automated estimates are sometimes very wrong, or at least predict values far different than sale prices.  That is because ultimately the worth of a domain is what someone will pay for it, and that will never be an exact science.

As a scientist I know that an estimate is improved by taking into account multiple independent values, and that is how I see automated tools and opinions of experienced domain investors co-existing. This is a long lead in to a post on a new extension specific approach to domain name evaluation.


New APP Specific Domain Name Estimation Tool


NamePros user un1 on July 6, 2018 posted an offer to use an Excel based tool developed to estimate the worth of APP extension domain names.  The tool works only for the single extension APP, since it takes into account

  • how related the domain name is to the names of apps on Google Play or the iOs App Store
  • how many downloads those apps have

Among the other aspects of the evaluation the poster lists the following.
  • search result performance
  • TLD penetration (how many extensions the word is registered in)
  • traffic rank of the most similar domain with the highest rank (for example, for the appraisal of abc.app, the traffic rank of abc.com)
  • synthesis of appraisal results from different services (the poster does not specify which, but I presume at least GoValue and Estibot, possibly others)
  • length of the domain name
  • trademark strength  
  • meaningfulness
The scale is a mix of quantitative measures automatically assigned, and ratings assigned qualitatively.  For example, the developer explains that the trademark strength is assigned using the following Likert scale.

1 -> generic phrases or random letter combinations which are not used as trademarks (except possibly in a very regional micro company). .
2 -> deformed versions of strong trademarks (e.g. "itun") and/or out-of-context trademarks (e.g. "kandle")
3 -> well-known trademarks with no relevant apps released and/or no "mobile", "app-related" orientation (e.g. "baze") or generic names of mobile apps (e.g. "squadd", "dancingline" etc.)
4 -> well-known trademarks with apps released (or at least app-related orientation): e.g. "virgingames", "storspelare" etc. Rule: The sole activity is not the mobile app; the app is just the extension to the existing business.
5 -> well-known "mobile-first" trademarks (i.e. the main area of activity is 'app-related' services): e.g. "heimlich", "bambo", "xpro" etc.

Dollars or Scores


A number of people have commented on NamePros at various times that they find the automated tools worthwhile in expressing relative worth (i.e., whether name A is better than name B), even though they have no confidence in the dollar values given by the tools.  One aspect of the new tool is that it does not try to give a dollar figure for the evaluation, but rather a score on a 5 point scale, with a more valuable domain name being near the
  1. host.app = 4.73 (reported sale: $14,162) 
  2. RN.app = 4.42 (reported sale: $15,000) 
  3. HedgeFund.app = 3.13 (reported sale: $251) 
  4. YouProductive.app = 1.63 (reported sale: $1,300)
He does point out how his tool ranks those APP domain names that already have a NameBio recorded sales price.  As .app extension domain name sales increase, there will obviously be more data points both to evaluate the quality of the tool and also to convert points ratings into dollar value ranges.


Concluding Thoughts


I see a lot of value in a domain extension specific approach to automated evaluation.  GoValue currently rates (almost all) new domain extensions equally, and clearly this can't be right.  For example, when I checked just now it told me that pepperoni.pizza and pepperoni.science are worth exactly the same, $566.  That is clearly wrong!

Estibot do try to evaluate different extensions differently.  Although they do not disclose their detailed methodology, at least the way they structure their reports seems to indicate that in some cases (e.g., extensions like science) they span the dot and for their search statistics look at searches for the two parts together.  That is, for a word like planetary.science they would look at how searched (and advertised) "planetary science" was (as well as simply the word planetary).  While this is sensible here, for the new .icu (I See You) extension they seem to be doing the same as for extensions like science and spaace, and searching on the combination across the dot.  This does not make sense for this extension.

If the automated tool restricts itself to one extension, it can look at parameters important to that extension only.  For example, when evaluating .loan or .loans, it could look at how frequently that type of loan appears in commerce.

With well over a thousand extensions, even if country code extensions are not included, it would become chaotic to treat all individually of course.  However, some could be grouped together, and for some other extensions with limited registrations and sales, it is perhaps not sensible to try an automated worth estimate.

I welcome this new contribution to semi-automated domain worth, and look forward to seeing results from its application. I think several of the features, concentration on one extension only, use of a hybrid automated and human approach, and use of a scale rather than a dollar value, make it innovative and interesting.

Original post July 7, 2018.
Additional information added July 9, 2018.
Slight formatting change July 30, 2018 (no content change).

I have no association with the developer of this, or any other, automated domain value tools. The information on what parameters are used is taken from the original post.  You are responsible for your personal use of the information from any of these tools. This post is for information purposes only. The image that accompanies this posting is by Pixabay user geralt.

Featured Posts

Why Would Anyone Want a New Extension Domain Name?

Background A NamePros user asked this question: "Why (would) an end-user would want to invest in a ngTLD versus a .com domain nam...