NameStarter.com :: domaining business blog // Domaining for Domainers

Archive for the ‘marchex’ Category

Marchex sells record $3.3 million in domains on Q2

August 2, 2012Domaining, Domainnamewire, marchex, mchx, UncategorizedComments Off on Marchex sells record $3.3 million in domains on Q2

Not much else to smile about in its quarterly report.

Marchex just released earnings for its second quarter.

Most notable to the domain name industry is that the company had a record quarter for domain name sales — $3.3 million.

There’s no additional insight into the sales in the company press release, but perhaps we’ll get more from its conference call.

Marchex typically sells $1M-2.5M in domain names each quarter from its portfolio. Last time I checked the minimum offer it considered for a domain was $30,000.

Second quarter revenue was $34.0 million, compared to $38.8 in the same quarter last year.

GAAP income was $330,000, or one cent per share.


© DomainNameWire.com 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

No related posts.

Marchex successfully defends geo domain name in UDRP

May 11, 2012Domaining, Domainnamewire, John Berryhill, marchex, norcross, Policy & Law, udrpComments Off on Marchex successfully defends geo domain name in UDRP

Panel rules company can keep Norcross.com domain name.

Marchex has successfully defended the domain name Norcross.com in a UDRP with the help of domain name attorney John Berryhill.

Marchex acquired the domain when it bought Yun Ye’s Ultimate Search portfolio.

Norcross is a suburb of Atlanta and the parked page at Norcross.com has shown links related to Georgia, hotels, etc.

The complainant, Norcross Corporation, sells viscosity equipment. While I’ll applaud it for owning the domain name viscosity.com, it clearly was on the wrong side of this case.

Norcross Corporation complained that Marchex said it would only entertain offers of $30,000 or more for any of its domain names. Some panelists think they are equipped to appraise domain names and make comments about how outrageous certain asking prices are. But this three person panel gets it:

The fact that Respondent was only willing to sell the domain name to Complainants for a sum far in excess of its out-of-pocket expenses directly related to the domain name does not establish the requisite bad faith since the Respondent had a legitimate interest in the domain name. A domain name registrant is always permitted to sell a domain name to which it has rights for a profit; that constitutes bad faith only when the domain name was acquired primarily for the bad faith purpose of selling it to the trademark owner.

I’ll toast to that.


© DomainNameWire.com 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. Marchex Defends Domain from New Debt Reduction Company
  2. Marchex Defends Frontrunners.com Domain Name
  3. Marchex Wins UDRP for Walkaway.com

Is Marchex considering selling its domain name portfolio?

January 25, 2012Domain Sales, Domaining, Domainnamewire, marchex, ultimate search, yun yeComments Off on Is Marchex considering selling its domain name portfolio?

Company considering what to do with its domain name portfolio.

Marchex is often cited as starting a wave of acquisitions of domain portfolios when it announced the purchase of Ultimate Search from Yun Ye in 2004 for $164 million.

Now it is looking at “strategic alternatives” for its domain name portfolio.

From a press release issued today announcing preliminary earnings for Q4:

Marchex is also announcing that it is evaluating potential strategic alternatives for its non-call-driven products and assets, including its domain name assets, with a goal of further focusing on the products and opportunities that can drive business growth.

“The exploration of alternatives for our non-call advertising products and assets is driven by our goals to enhance shareholder value and to sharpen our strategic and financial focus,” said Mr. Horowitz. “As we have stated previously, we believe that we have a very rich asset base that is not being properly valued, and whether achieved through select development of these assets, sales of these assets, or a combination of both, we should more aggressively pursue how best to get this value realized.”

Marchex is betting the company on paid calls and is considering what to do with its domain portfolio.

The company already sells a couple million worth of domains from its portfolio each quarter. But it has a high median price tag on them.

A good purchase for someone like NameMedia?


© DomainNameWire.com 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. Marchex acquires domain names
  2. Marchex Sold $2.1 Million of Domains Last Quarter
  3. UPDATED: Marchex Revenue Sinks, Sells $1M in Domain Names

Marchex Shares Down 40% In 3 Months

November 15, 2011Domaining, Domainnamewire, marchex, UncategorizedComments Off on Marchex Shares Down 40% In 3 Months

Marchex gets smacked around in the stock market.

The stock market isn’t showing any love to Marchex, one of the world’s largest holders of domain names.

Shares closed today at just $6.38, down nearly 40% from their $10.57 opening price on August 15.

This is despite the company topping both earnings and revenue estimates for the third quarter in earnings released November 2.

The company is focusing heavily on its pay-per-call services.

Here’s how some other companies tied to the domain name industry have done during the same period:

Tucows (TCX) is up 6% to $.75
Demand Media (DMD) is down 24% to $6.99
Web.com (WWWW), which recently closes its acquisition of Network Solutions, is virtually unchanged at $10.57.


© DomainNameWire.com 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. Tucows and Marchex See Shares Bounce on Earnings
  2. Marchex Stock More Than Doubles In Less Than 5 Months
  3. Communicate.com Stock Plummets, Joins Tucows, Marchex

Is this Trademark Lawsuit Unethical or Something Worse?

September 24, 2011Domaining, Domainnamewire, lawsuit, marchex, Policy & Law, trademarkComments Off on Is this Trademark Lawsuit Unethical or Something Worse?

Trying to get a domain name that existed before your trademark.

I’m a big supporter of intellectual property rights. Unfortunately I’m stuck writing more often about lawyers and companies that overstep their bounds.

The latest case: Smart Tax Holdings, LLC. The company filed a federal lawsuit (pdf) against Marchex for the domain name SmartTax.com.

The plaintiff started using the name “Smart Tax” in 2006 and filed a trademark on it. The trademark was granted in November 2008.

SmartTax.com was originally registered in 2000. It was part of the Ultimate Search portfolio later acquired by Marchex.

So Marchex has owned the domain name since well before Smart Tax Holdings, LLC even started using the Smart Tax term. Yet its lawyer has the gall to write this:

Defendant has not used Plaintiff’s mark coincidentally, but rather chose to associate Plaintiff’s mark with its own website for the sole purpose of unfairly steering traffic thereto.

How can you suggest that a company is “unfairly steering traffic” to a domain name it owned many years before you existed?


© DomainNameWire.com 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. Marchex may have $24M in trademark domains
  2. New Top Level Domain Trademark Frontrunning Battle Heats Up
  3. Marchex tests domain parking service, full of trademark typos

Marchex Wins UDRP for Walkaway.com

June 22, 2011Domaining, Domainnamewire, John Berryhill, marchex, Policy & Law, udrpComments Off on Marchex Wins UDRP for Walkaway.com

Panel points out the perils of descriptive marks.

Marchex has successfully defended a UDRP case brought against its domain name Walkaway.com with the help of domain name attorney John Berryhill.

Complainant Walkaway Canada Incorporated is the company behind the Hyundai Assurance program. The program allowed new car buyers the opportunity to return their car and walk away from the loan in the event of a certain life event such as a job loss. It was offered during the depths of the recession when people were scared to buy cars because they might lose their job.

Marchex argued that the pay-per-click page at Walkaway.com included topics related to the descriptive nature of the term, such as to walk away from a home mortgage.

The panel agreed, writing:

Even if it is true that the ads in Respondent’s website are related to Complainant’s services, that is a problem of Complainant’s making. Having selected a descriptive term as its mark, Complainant must suffer the consequences, including the fair descriptive use of its mark by other parties.

Walkaway’s domain name is WalkawayProtection.com.


© DomainNameWire.com 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. Marchex Gets UDRP Win with Clara.com, Robot Blocking Justified
  2. UDRP Panel Questions Oversee.net’s Automated Domain Registration Processes
  3. Marchex Defends Domain from New Debt Reduction Company

Marchex Sold $2.1 Million of Domains Last Quarter

February 15, 2011Domain Sales, Domaining, Domainnamewire, marchexComments Off on Marchex Sold $2.1 Million of Domains Last Quarter

Marchex sells of more domain names.

Marchex reported GAAP earnings of two cents per share after the bell today on $28 million revenue in the fourth quarter of 2010.

It also announced that it sold $2.1 million of “non-strategic” domain names in the quarter. Marchex frequently reports seven figures worth of domain name sales in its earnings announcements.

The company is famous for buying Yun Ye’s domain name portfolio for $164 million. A number of domain names in its portfolio aren’t strategic to the company’s focus on local advertising and the company sells them on occasion — but for a price.

One person who contacted Marchex about a domain purchase told me the company won’t consider offers under $30,000 for a domain.

Full Marchex earnings information is available here.


© DomainNameWire.com 2011.

Get Certified Parking Stats at DNW Certified Stats.

Related posts:

  1. UPDATED: Marchex Revenue Sinks, Sells $1M in Domain Names
  2. Marchex Sells Another $1.3 Million in Domain Names
  3. Marchex Scales Back Domain Parking Service

Marchex Defends Domain from New Debt Reduction Company

July 8, 2010Domaining, Domainnamewire, marchex, Policy & Law, udrpComments Off on Marchex Defends Domain from New Debt Reduction Company

Chronology of registration “fatal” to complainant’s case.

Marchex has successfully defended the domain name uFirst.com, which it acquired as part of the acquisition of Ultimate Search. The challenge was brought by a United First Financial, a company that claims it can help you “build wealth and eliminate debt simultaneously”. Some say the company is just a pyramid scheme.

Regardless of the merits of United First Financial’s business, one thing’s for clear: its UDRP case lacked any merit. Yun Ye first registered the domain name back in 2001. Marchex bought his portfolio in 2005. The complainant didn’t exist until 2007. So proving that Yun Ye or Marchex registered the domain name in bad faith would be impossible.

The three person panel wrote:

The fact that the domain name registration predates the earliest date where the Complainant might have had rights in the UFIRST mark is fatal to the complaint. Given the registration chronology, the undisputed facts foreclose the Panel’s finding bad faith registration and use under Policy 4(a)iii.

Case closed. And another win for John Berryhill.


© DomainNameWire.com 2010.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Related posts:

  1. Marchex Defends Frontrunners.com Domain Name
  2. Roy Messer Defends Rent A Car Domain Name
  3. Marchex domain name company posts 142% revenue increase

Marchex Sells Another $1.3 Million in Domain Names

May 6, 2010Domain Sales, Domaining, Domainnamewire, marchexComments Off on Marchex Sells Another $1.3 Million in Domain Names

Marchex beats analyst expectations for Q1 and sells more domain names.

MarchexLocal marketing company Marchex sold $1.3 million worth of non-strategic domain names during the first quarter of 2010. This is in line with previous quarters. In an earnings press release, the company continued to note that “There is still significant demand for high quality domains and Marchex believes that will remain the case for the foreseeable future”. Marchex is known for only responding to domain sales inquiries if they approach $30,000 or more.

Overall, the company said adjusted earnings for Q1 came in at $.04 per share, compared to $.02 for the same period last year. That beat analysts expectations by a penny. Revenue was down $2.6 million to $24.0 million. Much of that can be attributed to no longer being able to offer Yahoo! paid inclusion services.

The company provided revenue guidance of $90 million to $95 million for 2010 and predicts more than $19.5 million in the current quarter.


© DomainNameWire.com 2009.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Related posts:

  1. UPDATED: Marchex Revenue Sinks, Sells $1M in Domain Names
  2. Tucows and Marchex See Shares Bounce on Earnings
  3. Marchex Revenue Falls 44%

Marchex Gets UDRP Win with Clara.com, Robot Blocking Justified

March 10, 2010Domaining, Domainnamewire, marchex, Policy & Law, udrpComments Off on Marchex Gets UDRP Win with Clara.com, Robot Blocking Justified

Company defends generic domain name and explains legitimate reasons for blocking robots.txt from parked domain names.

Marchex subsidiary MDNH has successfully defended the domain name Clara.com from an attack by a magazine publisher in Spain.

Complainant Rba Edipresse, S.L. owns a magazine called Clara, and argued that it should get the domain name because it has trademarks for the term “Clara” and that Marchex hadn’t used the domain name since it was registered.

Clara.com was one of the domain names Marchex acquired when it bought UltSearch. It pointed out that the domain name is generic (woman’s name, translates to “clear” in Spanish) and that the parked page at Clara.com didn’t contain links competing with the magazine. In other words, the magazine didn’t have exclusive rights to the term Clara. The panel agreed with this assessment.

The complainant argued that Marchex’s use of robots.txt to exclude bots from visiting the site, including Archive.org, was a sign of bad faith. Complainants frequently suggest that using robots.txt to block archive.org is a sign of bad faith, especially when the block is placed after a complaint is received. In this case, robots.txt was in place well before the complaint was made. Further, Marchex and sttorney John Berryhill explained many legitimate reasons why the company uses robots.txt on parked domain names:

1. Lowers bandwidth costs
2. Limits click fraud and appearance of click fraud due to same IP
3. Avoids reverse engineering, copyright issues, click fraud, and other issues inherent with archiving
4. Keep parked pages out of search engines
5. Archived pages show only what was visible in one location; geo-targeting of parked domains means archives not accurate for all users


© DomainNameWire.com 2009.

Review and rate domain name parking companies at Parking Judge.

Related posts:

  1. Marchex tests domain parking service, full of trademark typos
  2. Marchex domain name company posts 142% revenue increase
  3. Can Marchex Pull it Off?