2 ms·

"If you make it big enough to have to buy the .com from the current owner, then you are probably going to be able to buy it. " Let me address that specifically

by larrys 13y ago

"If you make it big enough to have to buy the .com from the current owner, then you are probably going to be able to buy it. " Let me address that specifically. First, you get people who are unreasonable and perhaps would think that because you are valued at a billion you will pay them 500 million or something stupid like that. They are wrong but their irrationality is not going to make it easy for you to get the domain when you want it. I have a case right now where a startup is willing to pay, say, $100,000 for a domain. But the domain (not being used) is owned by a company in Europe. And they aren't interested in selling at any price near that. And the domain is not worth $100,000. Second, your thoughts assume either "make it or don't". There is an in between state. Where you appear successful and profitable but you don't have unlimited google resources. And actually I think it's quite obvious that there are a few companies that fall into this category. Since of course most people are not going to be "big enough" to buy what they want "at any price".

crisnoble 13y ago
I agree that squatters can be unreasonable or downright insane. I think that my main argument is that owning a ".com" neither helps nor hinders a startup and its quest for eyes. I could never remember how to spell del.icio.us, but it didn't matter, I bookmarked it. If I was on another computer, I googled it.
- smtddr 13y ago
  >I agree that squatters can be unreasonable or downright insane. There use to be a company called songbirdnest.com that made something that could be described as an open-source version of iTunes(but they preferred it wasn't thought of that way). The person who owns songbird.com refused to sell. Apparently a very hansom offer was made too... http://songbird.com/ http://songbird.com/ site looks the same as it did back in 2008. Considering that the site doesn't look like anything that's generating revenue, I don't understand why that person refused to sell...
  - username223 13y ago
    > Considering that the site doesn't look like anything that's generating revenue, I don't understand why that person refused to sell... Maybe because unlike you, he's not an unquestioning whore to the almighty dollar. (I expected a small bird-feeder business before I clicked, but the point remains.)
    - smtddr 13y ago
      >username223 33 minutes ago | link Maybe because unlike you, he's not an unquestioning whore to the almighty dollar. (I expected a small bird-feeder business before I clicked, but the point remains.) Ouch. You've hurt my feelings. Just like to add that if he said something about sentimental value or some such, I'd understand. Otherwise, why refuse just for the sake of refusing? But, seeing as you're already on insult-mode, probably nothing good will come of this discussion.

by larrys 13y ago

crisnoble 13y ago

I agree that squatters can be unreasonable or downright insane. I think that my main argument is that owning a ".com" neither helps nor hinders a startup and its quest for eyes. I could never remember how to spell del.icio.us, but it didn't matter, I bookmarked it. If I was on another computer, I googled it.

smtddr 13y ago
>I agree that squatters can be unreasonable or downright insane. There use to be a company called songbirdnest.com that made something that could be described as an open-source version of iTunes(but they preferred it wasn't thought of that way). The person who owns songbird.com refused to sell. Apparently a very hansom offer was made too... http://songbird.com/ http://songbird.com/ site looks the same as it did back in 2008. Considering that the site doesn't look like anything that's generating revenue, I don't understand why that person refused to sell...
- username223 13y ago
  > Considering that the site doesn't look like anything that's generating revenue, I don't understand why that person refused to sell... Maybe because unlike you, he's not an unquestioning whore to the almighty dollar. (I expected a small bird-feeder business before I clicked, but the point remains.)
  - smtddr 13y ago
    >username223 33 minutes ago | link Maybe because unlike you, he's not an unquestioning whore to the almighty dollar. (I expected a small bird-feeder business before I clicked, but the point remains.) Ouch. You've hurt my feelings. Just like to add that if he said something about sentimental value or some such, I'd understand. Otherwise, why refuse just for the sake of refusing? But, seeing as you're already on insult-mode, probably nothing good will come of this discussion.