I want to share an interesting story about a domain name I recently owned. The three word .com domain name was originally acquired in 2021 for $10 in a DropCatch Discount Club backorder. There is nothing that stands out about this particular domain name.
For a few years, it sat without any purchase interest. It was listed for $997 on Afternic with a 10 month LTO option. In 2024, someone purchased it via LTO. They paid four months before canceling the LTO. The total payout was $338.96.
Claw.com is a domain name that has been long-owned by Hasbro. The domain name was originally created in 1996. Claw.com doesn’t resolve to any website at the moment. In looking back at Archive.org, Claw.com was used independently more than 20 years ago. At some points in time, it appears to have forwarded to the toy maker’s Hasbro.com website.
OpenClaw is an open-source, autonomous AI agent platform that people have been using to create and operate their own agents. OpenClaw was very recently acquired by OpenAI. Many developers have been using OpenClaw and building various products and services that integrate with OpenClaw or operate using OpenClaw. Some of these use OpenClaw or Claw within their branding.
This morning, I noticed a Whois change for the Green.com domain name courtesy of a Registrant Monitor alert at DomainTools. Green.com had been long owned by IAC and registered at MarkMonitor. The domain name is now registered to DNStination, Inc., the MarkMonitor Whois privacy service. In addition to this change, the nameservers also changed and there’s a new landing page with a logo for Splash.
When I clicked the hiring link on the landing page, I learned Splash is a neobank startup. Its LinkedIn page says the company is “building a consumer finance app for emerging markets, in partnership with extremely large distribution partners.” I also saw the company uses Splash.cash for its website. The landing page on Splash.cash and Green.com are now the same.
When a UDRP is filed and the registrar is served with the complaint, the registrar releases the registrant details to the complainant. This ostensibly allows the complainant to fully understand whether they should proceed with the dispute or withdraw it. If a single domain name UDRP is withdrawn before a panelist is appointed, WIPO would refund $1,000 of the $1,500 filing fee, retaining $500 as a processing fee.
For instance, if I believe ElliotSilver.com is infringing on my trademark and the Whois information is private, a UDRP filing might quickly show me the registrant is also named Elliot Silver, and I should withdraw my UDRP because it is not winnable. In this case, I would have paid WIPO $1,500 and would have lost $500 as a processing fee.
Many prospective domain name buyers confuse sincerity with seriousness.
A buyer can be completely sincere about their interest in buying a domain name. They may really like a domain name and understand how it would help their business. They may even picture how they will display it in their marketing materials and use it to drive revenue to their business. That interest and excitement is absolutely sincere.
On many occasions, I have been told by prospective buyers how serious they are about their interest in one of my domain names. They are all ready to buy it but there’s just one issue – the budget. Sincerity is not the same thing as seriousness.
Dynadot posted a job opening on LinkedIn that might appeal to someone in the domain investment community with a marketing background. The company is looking to hire a Digital Marketing Manager.
The person hired for this job will help to lead and scale the company’s social media and lifecycle email marketing efforts. The role is performance oriented, with accountability for KPIs and revenue impact. The person hired will be responsible for managing and mentoring a small marketing team within the company.
