Daily Poll: Was the Purple.com Deal Better for the Buyer or Seller?

19

In a tweet over the weekend, George Kirikos shared what appears to be the purchase price for the Purple.com domain name, which sold last year. According to the SEC document George referenced, it appears that Purple.com sold for $900,000 although I don’t know if there was any confirmation beyond the SEC document. After George’s tweet, there was some discussion about whether this was a good deal for the buyer or seller.

In looking at some color .com domain name sales, it seems like a pretty reasonable price. In addition, Black.com was listed for sale for $750,000 last year, and it subsequently sold for an amount that was not publicly reported. Personally, I think Black.com is a more valuable domain name, although I can’t think of a major brand called “Black” off the top of my head (the AmEx “Black” card is my first thought, although that is branded as Centurion). On the other hand, there are very few domain names of the caliber of Purple.com, and in the back of my mind it just feels like a seven figure domain name.

I can see why people might believe it was a good deal for the buyer, and I can also see why this was a good price for the seller.

Today’s poll asks whether you think the Purple.com sale was good for the buyer, the seller, or a fair deal for both parties based on the information we know (update: from my reading of this tweet, there may be more to the story that is unknown to me). You are always welcome to share additional thoughts beyond voting in the poll:


19 COMMENTS

  1. It was a fair deal for both parties. Why? Because the buyer and seller agreed to a price that was more than Black.com and they made it happen. No doubt, when these large sales are announced its easy to be domain name Monday morning QB; but for everyone not named Rick Schwartz, $900,000 today is better than possibly $1.5 million 5 years from today or never…

    • There is absolutely that risk of re-branding if Purple Mattress is sold (Amazon is lurking). So, the seller took the deal that they believed was the best to come along, as they have likely turned down hundreds of offers over a 20 yr period too…

    • > “It was a fair deal for both parties. Why? Because the buyer and seller agreed to a price that was more than Black.com and they made it happen.”

      It’s embarrassing to even read that. That is not even the practice of logic at all, let alone bad logic.

      “Black.com” was simply an example of Aron Meystedt and Heritage Auctions behaving badly in a way that is harmful to the industry, nothing more and nothing less. What happened there not only has no bearing on the value of Purple.com, but also no bearing whatsoever on the value of Black.com either.

      I could say more of course, and no doubt this will probably earn a little something from someone including Elliot…

    • > “Also, if Purple Mattress is ever acquired and rebranded, the most obvious buyer might not have an interest in the name any longer.”

      Okay well this time by replying to “Sigma” that way you are simply being “part of the problem,” Elliot.

      https://onlinedomain.com/2018/02/22/domain-name-news/%CE%B1-domain-name-worth-buyer-willing-pay/#comment-230456

      “The real estate analogy is only that, an analogy, and only goes so far, although it is certainly a great analogy. That means alleged and purported “comparables” for instance are often completely meaningless or completely invalid. That also means data about what *has* occurred often has no bearing whatsoever on what should occur or what a particular piece of digital “real estate” is really worth. It is also important to remember that the “real estate” involved is “commercial real estate,” not residential real estate, except perhaps on occasion when you are comparing to the world’s great residential mansions. […]”

      Now for the record:

      As I have touched upon elsewhere recently, I don’t necessarily blame the seller at all, and it’s perfectly understandable there may be many reasons to sell at $900k now for an individual and their specific individual situation.

      The problem is stop being so beaten down and don’t go serving and drinking Kool-Aid about it, including serving to and drinking it oneself, and saying what nice new clothes the emperor has on.

    • P.S. And in case anyone hasn’t noticed or it hasn’t occurred to anyone yet, people ostensibly in the industry even thinking and then writing that way is a prime and serious example of just how harmful such phenomena really are – for all of us.

  2. 7 million dollar domain name if Rick Schwartz owns it. 900k if desperate average person owns it. why do people leave money on the table? Why?

    • NO FAIR DEAL !! no fair deals ever. you must plow over the buyer like a freight train plowing over stupid cows on the tracks. we are not selling Chevrolets here these are unique online realestate domains. you must pulverize the buyer or let him keep sending emails which you will automatically delete. f–k the buyer. you have to be like Alec Baldwin in GlenGarry Glenn Ross “F U I don’t need you you need my domain otherwise you wouldn’t have contacted me.” it don’t matter what the domain is Automatic response $2.5 Million dollars no matter what the domain is. if everyone in the domain industry did that we would all be rich but noooo 900k please please please its “FAIR”

    • I agree. Get as much as you can, but Elliot asked if it was a ‘fair’ deal. As far as has been reported, the buyer didn’t take advantage of the seller. We don’t know if the former owner of Purple.com was desperate at all. For all we know, they may have already been rich. Without a doubt, Rick Schwartz is the Domain King for a reason…

    • > “why do people leave money on the table? Why?”

      If you want to know “why” just keep reading the comments I’ve already been posting which explain why for months now here, at DNW, TheDomains, OnlineDomain…

  3. Low price, Black.com was a wholesale transaction. It is the kind of name where they will will be well funded companies regularly hoping to buy it.

  4. I was lying awake in bed this morning – and this stuff is not exactly what I normally think of when I am, by the way – but this time it was for a bit.

    And it occurred to me how very much the issue of “commercial” vs. “residential” may need to be reemphasized and perhaps expanded upon regarding people’s thinking about the value of domain names and especially in relation to the beloved analogy of “real estate” which I also like. In fact, it may even need to be additionally discussed in relation to that equally once beloved game “Monopoly” so many of us grew up with no less, for those familiar with that.

    And so I shall, God willing, but later.

    (Multi-part recap for now: https://domainnamewire.com/2018/03/12/the-value-of-a-category-killer-domain-dnw-podcast-176/#comments)

    • (Well, let’s face it, each morning wake time certainly does include at least some time spent thinking about domain related matters, however small an amount. Just not always like today.)

Leave a Reply