The Value of Aged Domains
March 25th, 2008Recently, I came into possession of a domain name registered in 1991. This domain has been continuously renewed for 17 years. (its almost old enough to vote!). However, Ive run into a few question marks, specifically in regards to determining value. Clearly older domain names have Value, they are garbled up at the expired domain auctions quite consistently, and although most caliber domainers will say that “age is but a small factor” when it comes to a VERY old domain, it can certainly become one of the most important factors.
Why is age so desired? Primarily because all the good domains were taken first, thus in theory all of the quality domain names, should be old. I find this too be a reasonably accurate statement, with exceptions on both ends. Yes, some new domains are quite valuable (new technologies, new trends) and some old domains really have nothing to offer but a history of continuous renewal.
However, when we start talking about the very beginning of the Internet, thats when things get interesting. Think about this for a moment; this 17 year old domain was registered 3 years before sex.com.
Finally, aged domain names have advantages when it comes to Search engines. Google had acknowledged that they in fact take a domains age into its massive algorithm to help determine rank placement. How much of an impact this has on rankings is really debatable.
Unfortunately, its a bit complicated to sort domains and sales prices by the age of the domain name, which is another reason the feature is not currently included on NameBio. Perhaps in later versions this technology will be added, but until then. I may just have to let the domain market itself determine value.
I have to be honest with you, I don’t believe the whole SEO angle. Aged website - yes, aged links - absolutely, but i think age of domain - especially if there has been no site means very, very little.
I asked a big name SEO a few months ago if he thought domain age meant much and he looked at me like I had three heads.
Comment by Gordon — March 25, 2008 @ 6:45 pm
Gordon,
I do appreciate you taking the time to comment. I have researched the idea and I have seen both arguments. I personally have no clue, however I have been leaning towards Google including the age as a very minor metric based on quite a bit of the data I had seen. At one point I did read an interview where a Google employee did explain that age was part of the algorithm. If anyone finds that article, a Link would be great.
Thanks,
Justin
Comment by admin — March 25, 2008 @ 7:14 pm
Justin - wouldn’t be surprised if it is a part, but like you said 1 of 200 bits they use.
Comment by Gordon — March 25, 2008 @ 9:58 pm
Gordon,
Bingo. The question here is how much of the algorithm does Age really affect? And Im guessing its closer to the bottom of the list then the top.
Justin
Comment by admin — March 25, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
Hello Justin,
The only value old names having no traffic, no PR, no link popularity and not based in popular terms… is the affective value a domain name lover may have for very old names.
Sorry, but in other words: NOTHING!
…
Regarding SEO: ZERO!
Except the domain have been getting link back periodically, and even like this the age is insignificant in the rank algorythm.
The expiration date may be much more important, so imagine…
Domains are not wine!
This value of age in domains was invented by appraisers to can show more metrics to their clients and justify their appraisal pricing.
When a domainer start to talk me about age I know he is trying to sell me garbage
Because it’s probably the worst and uselless metric in domain valuation.
Friendly.
Comment by Francois — March 26, 2008 @ 4:02 am
Francois,
Thanks for your input. Although I do agree that many domainers attempt to sell the age of a domain name, and not the name itself, I will disagree it has value, if it is only Novelty value. This particular acquisition is a premium letter LLLL.com, which in itself holds reasonable value, the age simply adds a bit of “novelty” value, in my opinion.
Thanks for your thoughts,
Justin
Comment by admin — March 26, 2008 @ 12:06 pm