Power.com Shuts Down, Domain Name Up For Sale
Backlink: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/et4pGdyc4ME/
Power.com Shuts Down, Domain Name Up For Sale
Backlink: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/et4pGdyc4ME/
Navigating the world of domain names can be a daunting task if you're not up to speed on how to get one.
With countless caveats and hosting companies out there, it's easy to be overwhelmed or worse, make a mistake that could ultimately cripple your business.
Consider these do's and don'ts from small-business owners and experts to help secure your company's domain name.
Do: Include a location or keywords in your domain name, if you can.
If your business focuses on a geographic region, try to put the location into the name of your domain, says Jean Bedord, a Silicon Valley-based search consultant and author of the book I've Got a Domain Name--Now What???
When Mikalai Krivenko needed a domain for his painting business in Hoboken, N.J., in 2009, his son Yuriy, a Brooklyn-based search-optimization specialist, suggested he put "Hoboken" in the name. For $11, Krivenko bought hobokenpainter.com, which shows up at the top of keyword searches that include "Hoboken" and "painter." Whether it's location, or what your company does, Krivenko advises: "Put the most important keyword for your industry in the domain name."
Do: Register yourself as the owner of the domain name.
Some business owners make the mistake of not checking to ensure whoever registers their domain name does so under the business owner's name. It's very important to be sure you are the domain owner and administrative contact, says Bedord. "It's just like a piece of property. If you don't own the property, you can't sell an existing business," she says.
It's an obvious, yet common, mistake made by business owners. Three years after Graham Hunt, 44, started his real estate firm Valencia Property in Spain in 2000, the two-person web design team he hired to build his site split and he had to choose between them. Hunt soon discovered the partner he didn't choose had registered himself as the owner and administrative contact for the domain name, so Hunt didn't own his own website. It took three years and he ended up paying the disgruntled partner nearly $6,000 in sales commission fees to get back ownership of the domain, which originally cost just $15.
Do: Remember to renew your domain name registration.
When Nick Hoffmann, 32, missed the renewal of his networking company's domain name inetguru.com in 2000, it was a crippling business blow. The name got bought by someone else and without email access through the site, Hoffmann lost contact with clients. Eventually, he folded the company. Now working as chief operating officer for an aftermarket marketplace for domains, Hoffmann suggests buying a registration for five or 10 years upfront, or setting up an annual auto-renew payment.
Just make sure the credit card on file doesn't expire, another common mistake that might lead to losing a domain name. "The whole aftermarket industry is based on names that drop off," he says. "It happens every day."
Don't: Use dashes, abbreviations or numbers in your domain name.
Instead, come up with a catchy name that's easy to remember and captures your business. Fan Bi, co-founder of Blank Label, a Boston-based online custom dress shirt company learned that lesson when settling on a domain in 2008. At the time, blanklabel.com was out of his price range at $15,000.
Bi chose blank-label.com for a much cheaper $250. But as the business grew, he realized the hyphenated name was far from the best choice. "You get much more word-of-mouth if it's a name you can easily say without having to spell out," Bi says. Last year, after months of negotiation with the domain owner, he was able to purchase blanklabel.com for $6,000. Just three months after the change, website traffic shot up 25%.
Don't: Waste money on extensions other than .com.
When you register your domain name, you'll be bombarded with offers to purchase other versions like .net and .co. For most small businesses, that's not needed. Investing in other extensions becomes important when patenting something or protecting a trademark, says Bedord. If you think a competitor might want the .net version of your domain name, for example, consider taking it first. "The reality is you have to pay for every one of those," Bedord says. "The value is really in the .com."
Don't: Buy a domain without checking into its past.
Even available domains can be exposed to legal trouble if the name is too similar to another company's trademark. Nearly a year after launching New York-based LEEDTeacher in 2009, Zachary Rose learned the domain LEEDTeacher.com infringed on the registered trademark of a massive nonprofit.
Rose, now 29, received a cease-and-desist letter demanding he change the name of his green jobs training firm, and shut down the website. He ultimately paid $2,000 in lawyer fees, renamed the company Green Education Services and switched the domain to GreenEDU.com.
Aside from consulting a lawyer, check www.whois.net, which lists registered domain names, for other possible legal landmines, suggests Rose. The site also includes expired domains up for grabs, and you can learn what problems a name comes with. For example, if a previous domain owner violated a Google term and was banned from Google searches, you'll want to know before investing in the name, Rose says.
This post originally appeared at Entrepreneur.
Join the conversation about this story »
See Also:
What NOT To Do When You're Buying A Domain Name
Way back in 2006, Twitter launched as Twttr on Twttr.com because it was SMS-based texting service, at first.
After then-CEO Jack Dorsey and his chairman Ev Williams realized the service should focus more on the Web, they went out and bought Twitter.com for $7,500.
Ev tweeted about the price earlier this fall.
Today, Twitter raised $200 million at a whopping $3.7 billion valuation.
Click here to see how it got there >>Join the conversation about this story »
How Twitter.com Went From A $7,500 Domain To A $3.7 Billion Company
Wikileaks Lost Domain Name, Amazon Services Following DDOS Attack, Changes Its Web Address
Backlink: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DTWB/~3/GJ1WgsUFjfg/
Yesterday I answered a question on Quora concerning VC attention in the wake of endless meetings. My post Many ideas + few vcs = :-( was my response.
However, a participant in the discussion wrote a comment that was cynical about the venture selection process, partly due to lack of domain knowledge and partly due to the impact of “social proof.” The example for lack of depth of knowledge and in thought was the following:
If I went to a VC and showed them a technology that used key-value stores and novel caching mechanisms to speed up SPARQL queries on large RDF data sets by 10,000x, and then showed them a graph of the revenue growth of comparable semantic web infrastructure companies; what would the VC take away from that? If you are lucky, he will remember “they make something go faster,” and “other companies in this market are growing at 30 percent a year.”
My answer is below.
You raise an interesting point about the value of domain specificity (versus the generalist approach) to venture investing. You have a healthy cynicism and I’m sure it’s well-founded based upon your experience. In my fund, for instance, we are laser-focused on big data tools, technologies and applications. If you came to us with an idea that involved the technical depth you jokingly referred to above, it would be screened by my colleague Brad, who has his Ph.D in EE, signal processing and machine learning, worked at Lockheed and Microsoft, and was Craig Mundie’s technical adviser for six years. Would he be able to assess the potential impact of your idea? He would certainly understand the approach; whether he made the go/no go decision you would like is another matter entirely, but his domain expertise would render understanding a non-issue. This is one of the reasons why I think domain knowledge in venture investing is really important.
However, it is also incumbent upon the entrepreneur to choose the right VCs to target and to leverage their networks to get the warm introduction you mentioned above. And make no mistake, I agree with you that the warm introduction likely improves a VC's receptivity to a pitch by 100 times. But if an entrepreneur can’t figure out a way to get to me or one of my colleagues then they’re not trying very hard, and these people don’t possess the kind of persistence and determination I am looking for in an entrepreneur. You might think this is stupid; I don’t. It’s simply reality. This is very different, however, then the “follow the herd” mentality of social proof to which I believe you are referring. I’ve routinely done deals that many have thought were less attractive because I’ve believed in the entrepreneurs an the idea. This is also something you should be validating when you approach a potential investor. Have they led stuff? Do they have the courage of their convictions?
As to your final point, we listen to lots of pitches from companies, most of which we won’t invest in, because it’s our job: it’s fun; it’s stimulating; and it makes us better at picking the right companies and helping those companies to our fullest ability. True dat.
The commenter goes on to discuss the seeming randomness of the venture investment process and the apparent meaninglessness of meetings:
VCs are not domain experts. They are not qualified to critique the content of your pitch and evaluate the economic potential of your technology or business model. Even the top tier and exceptionally experienced VCs are often surprised at the success or failure of their portfolio companies; companies they believed were sure bets are often lackluster and near write-offs -- like Cisco -- turned out to be a goldmine.
When making an investment decision, a VC must integrate information from a very large number of very fuzzy factors, each of which has little predictive validity. Hopefully in aggregate these factors will result in a better-than-random investment decision.
Overall, I think pitches and communications outside of the boardroom are used as a screening mechanism, as a formalized way for a venture capitalist to evaluate you and your company against his internal factor model.
The material content of your pitch is almost irrelevant. I have no idea what most venture capitalists would gain from attentively listening to pitches instead of playing with their Blackberries.
There are some bold statements in this comment. VCs are not domain experts? Really? Hmmm…There are those who are not, though I know many who are. Whether a VC is a domain expert or not has little bearing on whether or not one is surprised by outcomes: EVERY venture investor has surprises on the upside and the downside, and myriad factors well beyond domain knowledge impact the success or failure of a business. HOWEVER, I’d argue that domain expertise helps mitigate randomness, but is not in and of itself the determining factor in venture outcomes. But it is certainly an important piece of the puzzle in my experience. Finally, I’d agree that pitch materials are of limited value, but are far from irrelevant. They help the investor understand the entrepreneur’s passion, vision and current thought process. I have worked with founders on establishing plans that are markedly different from those they came in with, because they had the domain knowledge and fertile mind to recognize a potentially better approach to addressing a market need. Other times the pitch was pretty much the business that got built, and with great success. Like everything in the venture business, and as noted in the comment above, venture investors go through an implicit factor analysis of which the pitch is a part. But on a stand-alone basis it is of limited value.
Bottom line, I’ve found that domain expertise has added a lot to our portfolio companies and has played a role in de-risking seed stage investments. I believe our entrepreneurs would agree. Perhaps there are those whose generalist knowledge is so vast and powerful that they can overcome gaps in domain expertise, and that they are comfortable subbing out this part of the due diligence process, but I don’t roll that way.
This article originally appeared at Information Arbitrage and is republished here with permission.
Join the conversation about this story »
See Also: