For Sale caffea.com (since 1999)

[caffea]

caffea.com

one word domain whose common name is coffee,
http://www.henriettesherbal.com/eclectic/felter/caffea-arab.html

old domain (whois history since 1999),
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://caffea.com



BIN set to 200>190>185 USD

Act now!

 

[Theo]

The domain's registration date is 8/6/2002.

 

[theinvestor]

It dropped acro.

 

[Theo]

Then it's not a "1999 domain", that's my point.

 

[caffea]

then why can we see its archived records at archive.org?
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://caffea.com

I am not the archive.org owner to make fake data...

 

[Theo]

Link to WHOIS info.

 

[theinvestor]

then why can we see its archived records at archive.org?
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://caffea.com

I am not the archive.org owner to make fake data...

It was first registered in 1999, but it dropped.

 

[Theo]

I have a domain first registered in 1987, then dropped and I got it in 2003. Is it a 1987 domain? No.

 

[caffea]

domaintools says A, archive.org says B; it doesn't mean A is correct and B is incorrect.

 

[Theo]

As long as you say "Originally registered in 1999 and dropped and re-registered in 2002" that's fine with me.

I buy old domains and inaccurate titles - and persisting commentary against the validity of my response - upset me.

Good luck with your sale; if it were a 1999 domain I'd buy it.

 

[caffea]

I agree with this statement,
"Originally registered in 1999 and dropped and re-registered in 2002".
But what you said at #2 upset me.

I have another "NOT 1999 domain", ciampino.com,

It has contiguous archived records from 1999-2002 at archive.org,
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ciampino.com

and it was dropped in 2002 but re-registered immediately.

You can say "it is a 2002 domain" (as same as other 2002 registered domains? I doubt it)

No offense.

 

[Theo]

Ok, see my point?

I'm spending unnecessary time explaining to you why your claim of a 1999 domain is incorrect.

When I skim through the post titles - I read: "1999 domain" so I am interested.
I read the post, see your link to Archive.org and then I look up the WHOIS info.

It's then clear that it's a domain that existed in 1999 and dropped.

What matters is the CURRENT registration date, and that's 2002.

So no, you can't say "1999 domain" - you should say "2002 domain".
And if I had seen that latter title, I would not have been interested in the domain.

I agree with this statement,
"Originally registered in 1999 and dropped and re-registered in 2002".
But what you said at #2 upset me.

I have another "NOT 1999 domain", ciampino.com,

It has contiguous archived records from 1999-2002 at archive.org,
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ciampino.com

and it was dropped in 2002 but re-registered immediately.

You can say "it is a 2002 domain" (as same as other 2002 registered domains? I doubt it)

No offense.

ciampino.com has a registration date of 2002-05-09

Again, it doesn't matter if it had an active web site for 10 years. Once it dropped, the new registration date is the one you can use to specify its age.

Yes, Archive.org is a great tool for its purpose. But what matters to determine the current age of a domain, is any WHOIS tool.

 

[caffea]

OK. Don't mention "NNNN domain" (It is not specific, or specific based on personal understanding). May I say "whois history since 1999"?

 

[Theo]

I'm here to help you understand the basics of domain age

When was xxxx .com registered? Look up the WHOIS. That's the birthday of the domain.

I guess saying "whois history since 1999" is a valid way to state that it existed then. Still, it's like legal mumbo-jumbo that might confuse some people not keen on checking the WHOIS info. It's better to state the actual registration date, in this case "2002".

 

[caffea]

I'm here to help you understand the basics of domain age

When was xxxx .com registered? Look up the WHOIS. That's the birthday of the domain.

I guess saying "whois history since 1999" is a valid way to state that it existed then. Still, it's like legal mumbo-jumbo that might confuse some people not keen on checking the WHOIS info. It's better to state the actual registration date, in this case "2002".

Thanks. But I still can't totally agree with you.

1. Google "domain age"
2. Enter the first hit "Domain Age Tool"
http://www.webconfs.com/domain-age.php
3. Enter domains. Press submit.

I got the following results,

No. Domain Name Age
1 ciampino.com 9 years 5 months old
2 caffea.com 9 years 0 months old


Meanwhile, if I check with another domain age tool,
http://www.seologs.com/dns/domain-check.html

It shows,

Domain age (approximately):
6 Years, 2 Months, 17 days.

Again, "domain age" is defined differently based on different references. It is NOT a vocabulary item.

 

[Theo]

And that's why you should only trust the WHOIS info at the registry.

You're questioning one of the fundamentals of domaining. Age is determined by the Registry, not by tools on the web for SEO purposes.

 

[caffea]

Anyway, I've learned a lot. Debate is good. Thanks!

 

[Theo]

That's great. I like the domain; I'd buy it if it were a 1999 one Best of luck and keep up the reading

 

[caffea]

BIN reduced!

 

[caffea]

BIN reduced!