closed Speculation in Kids.US....Now!!

[Duke]

Originally posted by stocdoctor
Funny Artkids.us was in my cart as well. Enom?

Yes I use Enom. Looks like that one went right down to the wire!

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by DryHeat

I'm scrambling for change here; I know its not going to last with this crowd on the hunt!

:laugh:

 

[DryHeat]

Oh well...may be not since Zoo mentioned of some potential TM issues

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by DryHeat
Oh well...may be not since Zoo mentioned of some potential TM issues

Oh so it was SpaceKids.us?

 

[StockDoctor]

Think positive! Maybe since we got there first, we have the first usage and common law trademark?

 

[bidawinner]

Originally posted by stocdoctor
Just as a fun test, lets see how long this one is available.

Cartoonkids.us

OK Stocdoctor...

I couldnt resist that one !

I reged both:
CartoonKids.US
Cartoons.Kids.US

50DNF coming your way !

 

[bidawinner]

Originally posted by bidawinner


OK Stocdoctor...

I couldnt resist that one !

I reged both:
CartoonKids.US
Cartoons.Kids.US

50DNF coming your way !

Geez stoc..didnt even see how many DNF you already have ! 18,000 ! you saving up for something for the misses

anyway..you have another 50...

and thanks for the heads up...

 

[StockDoctor]

Originally posted by bidawinner


OK Stocdoctor...

I couldnt resist that one !

I reged both:
CartoonKids.US
Cartoons.Kids.US

50DNF coming your way !

Yep I hope they work out for you. Anyone want any more, or should I just shut up?

 

[DryHeat]

Just got: LoveKids.US

(had to get it thru Go Daddy..eNom account empty!)


Wondering about two things:

What'd be the .US reg #s tomorrow?

What "alaneads" think about all this?

 

[William9]

I have to disagree with bidawinner on this one. The “KIDS DOT US” keyword and/or search battle will NOT play out like any other one we have seen.

That is because one of Kids.US site requirements is PROHIBITING linking to sites outside Kid.us.

Can’t you see it?? A parent boots the PC, sets the Kids’ safe software to KIDS.US ONLY, and goes to work. Later, the child, bored with Barney.kids.us, (probably as the parent goes out the door) types in DukeofEarl.us and batabing – a big screen pops up – DUKEOFEARL.US was safely blocked by Safety Software Inc, we are now returning you to Barney.kids.us. More than likely it was the Duke who was protected from the obnoxious kid.

Also, while Tariq has been a great miner and tactician in the domain game, I have to disagree with his selections on this one. That is reging toyskids.us and wishing that tremendous value will derive from toys.kids.us. Don’t get me wrong, I greatly respect both Tariq and the Duke and wish them tremendous wealth with all their investments. But on this one, time will tell if Tariq’s methodology was better than other regs.

 

[StockDoctor]

Ahhh come on. Back to the fun!

Jokeskids.us is available.

 

[DryHeat]

A parent boots the PC, sets the Kids’ safe software to KIDS.US ONLY, and goes to work

Then why bother with the concept (.kids.us) in the first place since such safeguards/measures are already in place!

 

[bidawinner]

Originally posted by William9
I have to disagree with bidawinner on this one. The “KIDS DOT US” keyword and/or search battle will NOT play out like any other one we have seen.

That is because one of Kids.US site requirements is PROHIBITING linking to sites outside Kid.us.

Can’t you see it?? A parent boots the PC, sets the Kids’ safe software to KIDS.US ONLY, and goes to work. Later, the child, bored with Barney.kids.us, (probably as the parent goes out the door) types in DukeofEarl.us and batabing – a big screen pops up – DUKEOFEARL.US was safely blocked by Safety Software Inc, we are now returning you to Barney.kids.us. More than likely it was the Duke who was protected from the obnoxious kid.

Also, while Tariq has been a great miner and tactician in the domain game, I have to disagree with his selections on this one. That is reging toyskids.us and wishing that tremendous value will derive from toys.kids.us. Don’t get me wrong, I greatly respect both Tariq and the Duke and wish them tremendous wealth with all their investments. But on this one, time will tell if Tariq’s methodology was better than other regs.

William..the point on these is type-ins.. you tend to foreget the "." One kid says to the other hey have you been to the Barney Kids site..whats the address..I think it's barneykids.us !

Thats what we are looking at...just speculation...
You can build a great little site for the typo traffic and possibly leverage that for a sale down the road.

Theres NO linking outside of kids.us ..dosent have to be...

 

[William9]

Thanks for your thoughts bidawinner. I checked my post. I cannot find that I said “There will be no type-ins or typos." My conclusion was:

“time will tell if Tariq’s methodology was BETTER than other regs”

I did not say no value or dumb. I merely indicted that the $6.95+ could be BETTER invested. Better is the key word in my statement.

Sorry it took me so long this time to respond but I accidentally posted it to the DNforumkids.us forum.

 

[Duke]

<<Theres NO linking outside of kids.us ..dosent have to be...>>

Exactly Bid. But because this is carrying speculation to the nth degree I probably won't do more than 2 or 3 (only took ArtKids.us) so far.

I do have to think that the party that gets the real Art.Kids.us will promote it heavily resulting in some free traffic for ArtKids.us, just as you illustrate. Will be interesting to see.

 

[William9]

Heat indicated:

”Then why bother with the concept (.kids.us) in the first place since such safeguards/measures are already in place!”

There is a very good reason Heat. Those safeguards are only attempts at filtering/censuring. I know 9-year olds get around the Nanny software.

Because there will supposed be registry/ISP checking, everything on KID.US is safe with Kids – the whole internet is effectively censured – something you cannot do with .com. Therefore each site does not have to be checked at the user level.

Have I explained my thoughts?

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by William9
I did not say no value or dumb. I merely indicted that the $6.95+ could be BETTER invested. Better is the key word in my statement.

Way to throw a wet blanket on the party William!

Can't say I disagree with you though. I do think it might be worth regging two or three really good ones (meaning the base word) as a speculative play but it is definitely not an area to get carried away with. Killer words like news and music and art will probably get enough promotion from the real kids.us versions to help our ersatz versions but I wouldn't want to drop far from the quality those words represent - and yes I would say that our traditional picks will prove to be more valuable than these. Just goes to show what happens when we get bored around here!

It's Desi's fault for bringing it up!

 

[DryHeat]

I understand your point, William, but you yourself acknowledge that:

I know 9-year olds get around the Nanny software.

So, how many parents are going to install such a stellar software that 10, 11 or 12 years old would not be able to get around and what makes us convinced that ALL the parents will even install such a software.

And, even more importantly, the focus of speculation is not at all kids or the parents but the website developers/owners who'd most likely to see the value in paying a little bit premium price to buy the "un-dotted" version of their .kids.us names to prevent dilution effect.

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by stocdoctor
Anyone want any more, or should I just shut up?

What else you got Doc? Free handouts always beats working for these things!

 

[William9]

Duke, one again your are correct. It is Desi’s fault.

I will post this before someone makes a critical post on these facts, understanding that I am NOT a speculator, I am a domain developer – My related regs started with Kidsus.info in November 2001! Got Kidsus.US in the April 2002 .US landrush, and ended with Kids-us.info last month. I am developing - just differently. Yeh, yeh the early bird gets the worm. Talk about worms, I got to get back and finish my dinner and the other bottle of wine (there was a 3 for 1 sale).