Quote:
Originally Posted by trader  DNgator.com I believe was likely not a high traffic site so do not see that much value from a traffic viewpoint. However, it appears to have been purchased based on current or lasting traffic value since if its purchase was in-fact attributable to the (very nice) dngator website it's odd the site would be taken down in favor of its use as a simple redirect. In addition, since it is a brandable name I am sure it will get little direct navigation traffic in the future especially with the site not active, making the buy even more unusual. |
Good points.
By comparison, it is difficult to compare this site to anything else
OTHER THAN a comparable site
in the same market.
If a domain news aggregator's traffic is 0.0000001% compared to Reuter's news aggregator then that simply is not a fair comparison.
But, if 85% of the DOMAIN MARKET is using, viewing, or linking to DNgator while at the same time 0.001% use Reuters then the comparison is again not fair.
In news, perhaps Reuter's and AP are the two dominant ones for comparison's sake.
In medicine, WebMD and MedScape.
In domains, not sure.
Point is, it is all about the market you are in.
When dealing with niche markets or specialty sites, there are so many
factors to exclude when measuring success. If the traffic to DNgator was only 50-60 a day (arbitrary numbers) yet 85-90% of domainers used it or linked to it, would one be likely to place the valuation on traffic? Of course not.
Better is not always a matter of
who is bigger. Ask GM about that.
Traffic in this case would be negligible in negotiations.
(remember: these are totally made up numbers to illustrate points of WHICH numbers have value and merit in this instance)