See I would have no problem paying 60x on a domain from a proven seller that has a good track record. However over the years I have purchased too many income producing domains at X times revenue for the traffic to instantly stop after the transfer of the domain.
Also if you are looking at a typo that the brand name might be washed out in 5-10 years 60 months is way to long to start earning money on it. Lets say 5 years ago you bought a typo for myspace at 60x, odds are you will never double what you paid for it and that would have been a bad investment.
the $500 offer was close to 5yrs, considering the amount earned at time of posting and as such, i would see you and them in same category and door is now open for you as well.
i also agree that 5 yrs ago that myspace typo @ 5 yr multiple would be bad investment, simply because ms faded long before that and overture had died as well....but i feel your point.
however, many old schoolers" still use 10yrs as the min for generic dn's that produce earnings and that 's without inclusion of intrinsic value for/of the domain.
While it's true that the auto loan analogy by David (Walker) may not be exactly appropriate, VERY few investors would pay up to 5 times earnings multiple even for established business.
i doubt that is accurate, as co's like "the new yahoo" are buying start-ups now based on "projections, trends and sm probabilities", where the multiples of off the chiz-zain
It's always useful to the domain seller to bring up any decent past earnings to a buyer (noob or pro) but that should be secondary to the quality of the domain itself, independent of earnings. While a gem should always make anyone good revenue , anything less than a megadomain has the risk that its income may fluctuate, and often the swings downwards are wide and long-lasting. Many times the original income you received as an avg at 1st will just never be replicated
if there are past earnings, it does help a "fence leaner fall over" and if i think of at the time, it's included. but many of the names have been posted in the past, with stats, so some consistency is there.
domain income doesn't always go down
i bought a name from a member years ago for low $,$$$, changed keyword and made $16k on it.
other names I've purchased still produce income since ovt, so i feel asking range is justified
but the variations in ppc income, is what caused the launch of so many other options of monetizing a domain.
I just find that many buyers hate basing an offer on past revenue because it may not last. A lot of buyers in fact just want a price for your name, and if they don't like your 1st answer they walk. I hate being put in that position especially w/noobs, having to justify my reasoning, but we all have to do it if we want to sell.
you said "hate" too many times.... find out why
And I see that in biggie's book
that book, is written "in-between" the lines and some have difficulty cyphering
I also liked David's two examples btw (cars and apartments), I think they're most relevant in biggie's argument
if we were a car or housing forum, i might agree
housing complex for sale versus a domain for sale
property is assessed value based on area plus rental income vs property taxes/mortgage/insurance/maintenance
5 yr auto loan on new cars come with 5yr 50k warranties, and insurance costs
where is the relevancy?
