- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Not so sure what others think but the price sounds low to me.
Either
1. Boss needed the cash,
2. is expecting lower revenues due to a crunch
3. they are keeping a residual on this assetThe Net Present Value on that name only is worth more
than $ 5.5 million.:rolleyes:
Boss is going through a complete streamlining process. They are cutting out all the dead wood – and apparently casino.com was considered an undesireable property for whatever reason.
Boss does need to undergo such a process as they are just not making the money they could. For some reason their casinos have not been converting well for a long time – with the occasional exception.
Lousy creatives and an unwillingness to keep up with the bonus structure in the industry may be a part of that problem.
I look forward to a revitalized and stabilized Boss media group. Their software really is quite nice, and lots could be accomplished.
I wonder if they will finally redo the Free Games?
Some of the free games I have looked at, I think the last was DiamondClub, had an embedded link inside the game console that went to casino.com
Rick
Universal4I remember reading several years ago that they had aquired the name for 2 million. They basically did nothing with it for all of these years, so it was quite a nice profit.
Hold on before too many assumptions are made about Boss Media, as they are a software company and making a nice sum of money.
The reason for the sale is due to Boss Media being offered $5.5 million dollars after buying it for just under 2 million which we all must agree was a small amount, on top of a nice incentive and this was the motivating factor to sell.
Boss Media have a nice suite of new casino games coming out and are concentrating on the future and simply did not have the time or the energy to focus on casino.com.
Too me it’s like Playboy Enterprises selling Sex.com if they had it.
… no long term strategic sense in my opinion.
If they didn’t need the cash why sell it ?
unless they sold it with some kind of residual deal or agreement
to still use it to their benefit although more limited… this way
1. they get the cash
2. pass on the focus to someone else
3. retain some use of itMy 2 cents … but then again like Wilma would say
” You don’t have all the facts Fred “
It wouldn’t have taken too many resources to use the casino.com domain name.
It would have taken 1 full time employee to make something of it. Furthermore they used it to advertise licensees, as it was an added incentive for licensees to sign up with them.
I agree that speaking in the long term this was a bad decision. But if they wanted quick money it was a good one.
Antoine
Also Antoine let’s keep in mind the following
English: Sex
French: Sexe
Italian: Sessoetc
English: Casino
French: Casino
Italian: Casinoetc
Selling is not smart move longterm says I
:bigsmile:
I don’t remember now where I read the news release, but it was a few weeks ago and it announced streamlining of operations and concentrating on nothing but casinos backed by land casinos.
They were not categorically closing/selling everything that wasn’t backed by landbased casinos, but they are getting rid of a whole lot of properties, and I am sure this site was part of that sweep.
It isn’t what they do and it didn’t fit in their new business plan.
Someone with that name could have easily displaced winneronline as the forum of choice for players…
Oh well…
see what I mean … in your hands it would have gone further
Hi,
call me crazy but I don’t think domain names are near as important now as they were a few years ago. While it is a no-brainer that a domain like casino.com is a head start; you still need to brand advertise and in that case; a unique name that can’t be confused easily with other names …. like …. gamblingfart.com is just as good to brand as is casino.com and for a whopping $5 million less …… that buys a lot of brand advertising.
a good example is godaddy.com. mention domain names and that’s what I think of; and it has nothing in its name about domains. But registerdomains.com registerdomain.com domainregister.com all can be confused and possible lose traffic to the other.
wish I’d have thought of that a lot sooner than I did.
my 2 cents.
I do agree with you on branding. But imagine how many people type in casino.com into the url bar.
I get several hits a week from people who type in casino.com into a search engine and for some reason they find my website. Combine this with how much easier it is to get listed high in the search engines.
If i had 5 million to invest or even 1 million i certainly would not waste it on a domain name. But a good name simplifies branding. Remember when overture.com had the domain name goto.com? Or disney had the go.com search engine? Those are a lot easier to brand than gotosearch.com
Then again winneronline and yahoo are two examples of good branding without the expensive domain names.
Antoine
