closed Channel11 .com - 231 w/ext overture

[Sarah]

.

Just picked this name up. If you notice, the best channel #'s to get are between 2 - 13 . Reason being is these are basic channels (non-cable) for the major US networks such as ABC, CBS, FOX, WB, NBC etc .. The major drop in overture w/ext results after channel13.com is a good indication of this . After channel 13 the ovt w/ext numbers just drop off the radar screen .

With that said, what do you think the value of Channel11. com is .. But first consider the following:

Channel 11 is the Major FOX network in the huge Los Angeles Television market .. As can be seen here www.fox11la.com .

It is the WB network in New York !! www.wb11.com

In the San Francisco/Oakland/ San Jose Region, channel 11 is NBC as can be viewed here- www.nbc11.com

In Texas, Channel 11 is CBS for the Dallas/FortWorth area www.cbs11tv.com . Also in Texas, Channel 11 is www.kcbd.com ( NBC) and www.khou.com

In the Baltimore / Washington DC area, channel 11 is NBC www.thewbalchannel.com

In Atlanta , channel 11 is NBC - www.11alive.com

In Colorado , it is CBS for - www.kktv.com and NBC for www.nbc11news.com

In the Carolina's it is ABC www.abc11tv.com

In Minneapolis, Minnesota and St.Paul, channel 11 is NBC - www.kare11.com

As you can see, I did some research before buying this name

These are just a few, there are dozens more where major networks in major US cities and regions claim Channel 11 .. Like www.wtol.com , www.wluk.com , www.upn11.com , www.winktv.com , www.kcbd.com to name some of them.

Considering this, what do you consider the value of the .com ? Thanks all in advance for your replies ..

.

 

[GT Web]

looks like a great name, but traffic will be the key in determining value...also I'm not sure about possible legal issues with this name...

as I said, traffic is key here, but it looks promising

 

[Sarah]

.
I checked for any trademark issues on it via uspto.gov and other sources and found nothing fortunately.

I'm thinking it must have great value because I called the other owners of channels 1 to 13 that I thought may be available and they either said it wasn't for sale or wanted $150k minimum ..

.

 

[stevo]

In Chicago - Public broadcasting WTTW Channel 11

$15,000 + imho

Great name Sarah

 

[Sarah]

In Chicago - Public broadcasting WTTW Channel 11

$15,000 + imho

Great name Sarah

Yep, thats www.wttw.com .. I just checked , in my old stomping grounds in Miami/South Florida Channel 11 is the spanish TV station "Telemundo" which is very very popular there.. Not bad considering Miami is mostly spanish .

.

 

[DNjet]

great pickup sarah, $30,000

 

[Dale Hubbard]

$100k on the basis of what I've read here. Good luck with it!

 

[Biggie]

channel11.com is a good name to have, but practically all tv stations use their call letters, rather than the channel they are broadcast from.

since tv programs and cable companies oftern move programming around to different channels, this names value is not what you thought it would be.

for instance in chicago > channel 2 long used by CBS is shown on channel "22"

if you can convert the traffic or get an offer, then this would determine value.

Good Luck

 

[aldwin]

I can't say much without knowing traffic, but I think that it has a great potential.. like every other channellNN.com..

maybe $10k+

 

[Sarah]

.

I see what your saying biggedon, however like I said my initial post, there is more inherent value in channel #'s 2 to 13 simply because for "non-cable" viewers these are the "basic" channels . I am sure this is why overture numbers drop significantly after Channel13.com (with extension).

You are talking cable. And even with cable , if a company is broadcasting channel 11 on channel 22, it is still known as channel 11 because it is always being advertised as channel 11 on tv programming .

.

 

[POLiSH]

$XX,XXX range .. Good Luck..

 

[Kaz]

Definetly of $10k
nice finds

 

[Focus]

mid to high $xx,xxx + easy generic with very high overture with ext, NO TM issues at all, pure straight up great domain!

 

[JeepinFL]

Hey Sarah,
I would say for the right company...the range of 5-10k! I think thats a fair estimate...again all depends upon traffic, type ins and how bad the company wants it!

-JeepinFL-

 

[stevo]

channel11.com is a good name to have, but practically all tv stations use their call letters, rather than the channel they are broadcast from.

Good Luck

No one says "Turn on WTTW". We all will say "Turn on Channel 11". This translates nationwide! You are talking about some very large metropolitan areas.

 

[NameGuy]

Good name but possible to lose it based on what I read on this similiar case:

http://www.arbforum.com/domains/decisions/98415.htm

 

[Sarah]

Good name but possible to lose it based on what I read on this similiar case

That case was an anomaly.. Previous registrant clearly used it in bad faith ..

I will use what a previous poster said in another forum ( Carlton) about this issue, and he is right-

The Channel 5 case is interesting, but a bit of an anomaly I think. The respondent was supposedly a reknowned cybersquatter who had already lost several cases on TM infringement. Importantly, the complainant had also registered (in the UK) the exact phrase "Channel 5", not a derivative. I would not assume that one can generalize future decisions from that particular case.

The fact that so many U.S. stations across the country are on Channel 11, or make reference to it, greatly reduces the likelihood that any one of them could claim exclusive use, ex. Miami Cycles, Miami Homes, and Miami Auto (none of whom could claim trademark rights to "Miami" due to its prevalence as a generic term). It would be virtually impossible for any entity to establish secondary meaning on the generic ,"Miami", and from that prohibit others from using the word.

.

 

[NameGuy]

I agree that the decision was flawed as that domain and yours are definitely generic domains, in my opinion. But the case does set a precedent which could be used against you should your name attract a complainant.

 

[Sarah]

.
I dont see how it sets a precedence considering in that case the complainant had the .co.uk extension for the "exact phrase " Channel5 ..

No other country extension or any extension does a news or television station own a "channel11' (in and of itself) extension ..

Not to add to the fact the previous owner of that name clearly used the name in bad faith for what he displayed.. He was a known cybersquatter who had been found guilty before and the panel simply had a bias against him to add on to it .

That case does not hold water when it comes to channel11.com, especially for the first reason I mentioned which is the basis of everything.. There are no parallels

If what you are saying is true, since the DomainKing owns the trademark to "gaysex" for example , he can get any domain name from anyone with gaysex in the name.. Just doesnt hold water what you are saying.. Because that can be true with any generic domain name or generic "word" in the world..

.

 

[NameGuy]

Indeed it does set a precedent in that it was a case based on a domain almost exactly like yours that went to the complainant. Now that the case is in the books, it doesn't matter what the circumstances were. And any complainant that were to file against your domain is certainly going to reference this case in the proceedings. That's all I'm trying to say.