@cactusfly You mentioned:
“a strong domain name, preferably short. Low budget.”
“Definitely not retail pricing.”
If I submit a name that genuinely meets the criteria but it exceeds your working budget, then it becomes a waste of time for both sides.
I’ve seen similar threads before where the requirements were very specific — two words, .com only, and registered in at least 50 extensions — yet the stated budget was in the low four-figure range. Realistically, names meeting that standard typically trade in the five-figure range. As a result, serious holders didn’t participate, and the thread mostly attracted irrelevant submissions.
This isn’t about retail vs. wholesale.
“Non-retail pricing” does not automatically mean low pricing. In the aftermarket, many investor-to-investor auction results exceed five figures. Those aren’t retail end-user prices — they reflect actual wholesale demand.
It’s really about alignment.
Without a realistic working range, sellers have no way to determine whether a strong, short .com is even within scope. When alignment is unclear, higher-quality submissions naturally decline.
If you’re simply looking to invest in this category of domains, it would be perfectly reasonable to just state a price range and see what comes in.
However, if this is genuinely a request on behalf of an end-user corporate client, then I don’t believe this is a mature acquisition approach. End-user brand purchases typically involve defined positioning, extension preferences, geographic scope, and a working budget range.
Clarity attracts quality.
Ambiguity attracts noise.