Noticing Better Quality In Pending Delete Domains!

I haven’t blogged about expiring domains in a while because there hasn’t been much that’s caught my eye. I have been scanning the drop lists, but nothing’s really popped out at me. Or the quantity of quality domains I spotted seemed to vary between 0-2 a day. It must be my screening methods, but tonight after scanning the drop list for the upcoming days, I’m noticing more quality surface up.

It’s been years since I’ve blogged about my chase lists, so I hope to do it more often. The problem is that if I post semi-good domains, others will chase them too. I’ll figure out a way to split my lists in the future so I can blog about dropping domains that I won’t be chasing and are up for grabs, then blog in the future about domains I chased and captured on the drop & didn’t blog about.

For tomorrow, I really like these domains:

spincoater.com – tld’s, wayback, product price, cpc
careerfashion.com – longer domains fit criteria, cpc
discountmower.com – longer domains fit criteria, cpc
jonga.com – tld’s wayback, popular
cyberperks.com – wayback
yulemarble.com – wayback

I have godaddy & bluerazor backorders added. I will also try with dynadot’s API – but I know that the quality of these drops will probably have snapnames & namejet backorders. Yulemarble & discountmower are iffy about having a hit put out (Backorder), but the rest probably will. If not, they will be fetched by other registrars for sure.

I will blog more lists in the future & try to break off the lists into what I think snap will chase, medium grade lists that are iffy & lists that I feel the api drop catchers can compete against.

Here’s a quick reference to the notes above:

cpc – the domain shows some kind of +1 value for an advertiser cost to advertise on the domain.

wayback – the domain shows some kind of wayback value for age or number of stored wayback pages.

product price – the domain specifically matches a product of significant value.

longer domains fit criteria – other domains exist that are longer & include this domain inside the longer domain.

popular – the domain shows up as a result of nested search engine keyword combination results.

I’ll try to keep the lists rolling in daily. Your feedback is appreciated as always.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

7 Comments »

 
  • Mike says:

    spincoater.com is great name, 1,900 and $4.5 CPC makes valuable. Creating AdSense based site would be cool and probably there is chance to sell this name to the right company for good money

  • admin says:

    Hi Mike, I agree an adsense site would workout for this domain. The cpc is very high & I also agree that a company can put the domain to use. It will be interesting to see who gets it.

    Dan

  • Jeff says:

    What exact search/cpc are you looking for Dan? What has worked for you?

  • admin says:

    Jeff, I usually screen cpc domains that drop. I then eyeball the list for domains that make sense to me. Usually a domain with high cpc may not make sense to me if the keywords are mixed up wrong or if it’s non-memorable. If I spot something catchy, I will usually go for it. I’ve had the most success in filtering by cpc and flipping the domains for a higher profit.

  • jeff says:

    What’s the minimum #s for searches/cpc

  • admin says:

    I mostly filter by $1 USD + for “Estimated CPC” for the domain “term” – not sld. I also filter by the number of sponsor ads that appear for each domain. If I have time, I also filter by search volume – but it doesn’t seem to help much in digging up more than cpc does. I tend to stick to the sweet zone of $1 – $4 approx for CPC on the domain term. Or at least, that’s usually where I end up at when adding to my chase lists.

  • Jeff says:

    in .com? Wouldn’t $1 cpc names be caught by snap?

 

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>