Gambling.com domain sets $9 million reserve price

[The Buzz]

Hoping to score that Gambling.com domain name, which just went on the auction block? Well, make sure you bring your checkbook, and make sure you enjoy writing the number zero a bunch of times. The reserve price for the domain name is $9 million, and Media Corp. is hoping to score at least $10 million.

From news.com.au:

Media Corporation, which paid US$20 million ($19.8 million) for gambling.com in May 2005 and earned $5.5 million from advertising on the site a year later, hopes to fetch more than $10 million for the name.

The domain name's depreciation in value is due to a ban on internet gambling in the US in October 2006.

[Anthony]

Slots.com sold for much more that I thought it would, so I am interested to see what gambling.com sells for.

[davenewgates]

You may have to handle how much you will cash out for that domain but the site will be a sure fire and you will still get the investment once it came out.

[JoeAdams]

Now, $9 million dollars is a reasonable price than $20 million dollars that was so huge price for such a banned domain.

[cat]

Slots.com sold for much more that I thought it would, so I am interested to see what gambling.com sells for.

how much did slots.com sell for?

[MichaelCorfman]

how much did slots.com sell for?

Slots.com was acquired in an auction by Bodog for $5.5 million recently.

Here is a thread that started with a poll about what folks thought the value was when it first came up for sale and ends with the actual sale value:

https://www.gpwa.org/forum/how-much-...th-188961.html.

Michael

[unclebada]

It is nice to see the news about the gambling.com, because it give an additional boost to the industry. Although the results of keyword searches may get a little unrealistic.

[brean78]

Was having a chat about this today with a few industry friends. General feeling was "White Elephant".

For those that are unfamiliar with the term, the wikipedia definition:

A white elephant is an idiom for a valuable possession of which its owner cannot dispose and whose cost (particularly cost of upkeep) is out of proportion to its usefulness or worth.

[craig96]

Man, if only I knew to buy loads of domain names as soon as the web started.

[bonusbeast]

Man, if only I knew to buy loads of domain names as soon as the web started.

Yeah this crosses my mind all the time Heck you didn't even need loads of them just one good one

[igamingrevenue]

Does anyone know, this will the third time gambling.com would have been sold?

[craig96]

Does anyone know, this will the third time gambling.com would have been sold?

Really? I never knew that. I wonder why? Either some quick coin or people may think that the site does not make that much.

But with ranking for the term "gambling" as that is the sites URL I am guessing the site gets decent visitors.

[TheBoyMitchell]

Really? I never knew that. I wonder why? Either some quick coin or people may think that the site does not make that much.

But with ranking for the term "gambling" as that is the sites URL I am guessing the site gets decent visitors.

The thing is, if you are going to spend 9 million on a site, you then have to rebuild it, implement your SEO team, get staff in etc.

So apart from the the site cost, you also have to allow running costs. And there just isnt enough money out their to make it pay for itself. So people buy it as an investment and hope to sell it on at a later date. No-one has made it work yet, and I seriously dont think anyone will.

The only way anyone could make this work would be for an operator to buy it and hold it for years as a going concern with their brands on it. If I was a betting man, I would go for someone like Playtech, who could happily put all their brands on it, SEO the shizzle out of it and get players.

Although of course, this would make operators being affiliates even more transparent, and if thats the case, a lot of affiliates might as well pack up and go home as their will be no market share left for them. Someone like Playtech could happily get a domain like this to pos 1 on all gambling terms, hoovering up 40 odd percent of the players and leaving everyone else scrabbling for positions 2 and 3. After all, as an operator they will also know all the search terms that people are using and can use the site to dominate not only broad searches but also little niches - and their rivals too.

The only person ever to make money from this domain was GL who bought it in the first place and sold it for millions initially. Nice work for him, but gambling.com, although it *should* be a workable affiliate site isnt, purely because the initial costs are too high for 99% of people.

[craig96]

The thing is, if you are going to spend 9 million on a site, you then have to rebuild it, implement your SEO team, get staff in etc.

So apart from the the site cost, you also have to allow running costs. And there just isnt enough money out their to make it pay for itself. So people buy it as an investment and hope to sell it on at a later date. No-one has made it work yet, and I seriously dont think anyone will.

The only way anyone could make this work would be for an operator to buy it and hold it for years as a going concern with their brands on it. If I was a betting man, I would go for someone like Playtech, who could happily put all their brands on it, SEO the shizzle out of it and get players.

Although of course, this would make operators being affiliates even more transparent, and if thats the case, a lot of affiliates might as well pack up and go home as their will be no market share left for them. Someone like Playtech could happily get a domain like this to pos 1 on all gambling terms, hoovering up 40 odd percent of the players and leaving everyone else scrabbling for positions 2 and 3. After all, as an operator they will also know all the search terms that people are using and can use the site to dominate not only broad searches but also little niches - and their rivals too.

The only person ever to make money from this domain was GL who bought it in the first place and sold it for millions initially. Nice work for him, but gambling.com, although it *should* be a workable affiliate site isnt, purely because the initial costs are too high for 99% of people.

Hey, some nice info, thanks.

One day it will probably get into the wrong SEO team and they will run the site into the ground.

Yeah, it does not make a brand name and would be a great affiliate site but that would be too obvious.

I would rather have 9 million and buy a long domain name and work it from the ground up.

Infact, with 9 million I would not give a crap about buying domain names.

[SlotsAff]

I agree entirely here..........maybe a large operator could purchase this and make it work but it will cost much more than the reserve price.

[TheGooner]

Let's spell it out clearly :

Owning a domain name that is generically about your subject matter - but not specific enough to be brandable or about a particular facet is not a license to print money.

I'm a big football fan - but I've never visited football.com
I'm interested in betting and gambling - but I've never been to betting.com or gambling.com

I'm told that sex.com is an example of a generic working - but I've never been there - and I suspect that domains that specialise in specific niches such as t*ts.com or b**bs.com do better.

It's the same with retail space. We don't see stores called CLOTHES, or FOOD, or CARS ... the best stores are specific brand names that build an association with their name and the product.

Spending millions on a blank domain name is not a smart move - even if you have the money to do it right with content and links it's still not a domain name that speaks as to what it does in gambling.

Online, offline, blackjack, slots, craps, roulette, poker, rummy, sports, bingo etc, etc, etc,. It's a big field and the domain name is too generic to appeal to keyword searchers and to generic to have a brandname that can be TMed and pushed.

At least that's my view ... but I'd probably be expected to say that with GoonersGuide.com as my main site.