Morning Folks!!
Sometimes you realize you just can’t explain an issue better
than somebody else already did. Such is the case with the DNJournal article on
Michael Berkens. What happens when
you can’t explain something very simple, but complex and abstract is that you get frustrated. But when you can articulate something to your own
satisfaction, that gives a sense of calm and control.
Recently I have written a few blogs about human nature. But
I never dug deep as Mike did. This is what he wrote and I think it helps
explain things in a calm and understanding manner:
'If
you read TechCrunch
any time they have a post concerning domains, read the comments and you will
see what I mean - people hate
domainers. Although all of them wished they registered sex.com back in the day and sold it for $12 million they hate you for
having the foresight. This mentality is not exclusive to domainers. Human
nature is highly jealous of success.'
'Somewhere along the way we went
from a society who looked at success stories and used them as inspiration to create their own, to one
that looks at successful people and eagerly awaits and looks forward to their
fall. If you could get the honest answer of the American population,
almost all would say they admire Donald
Trump, almost all would love to be like him, enjoy the success he has, but
almost all would say they would be happy
if he lost it all.'
'Everyone would love to have 100
great domains they could have registered in 1995. Everyone wants to have what
Frank has. But 99.9% of the general
population missed the boat and now
they’re pissed off at the one’s who
got onboard, who thought of it first, who beat
them to the punch.'
'People who own a lot of
apartments are called “slumlords.' People who take over public companies
are called “corporate raiders.' People who practice law and get large
verdicts are called “ambulance chasers.' People who have sudden success
are dismissed as being “Lucky.' People who own a lot of domains are call
“cybersquatters.' This is human
nature,' Berkens said.
'However 'Yes, the best thing about being
the domainers I know are extremely
hard working. Honestly, I don’t remember the last day I had a whole day
off. Its certainly been many years ago, and probably because I couldn’t
get a connection or my computer’s hard drive failed. However, I think that is typical of domainers. The domainers
I know work, or worked, when they were building up their portfolio, 7 days a
week, 10+ hours a day, 365 days a year,' Berkens said.
a domainer is you can work anywhere, the worst thing is you work everywhere. Domainers by and large
are self-made. I don’t know
of any domainer who grew up with a ton of
money. We either made money in a previous business or in the domain
business but what we have, we earned.'
'Domain holders created
an industry. An industry that didn’t even eThixist 10 years ago. A very
profitable one. We’re living the
American dream,' Berkens concluded.
This is just a tiny part of the article Ron Jackson did on
Mike Berkens. Mike is one of the few people in this industry that “I” actually
pay attention to. Besides, Bandit was one of the biggest motivations for
getting Freddy.
Have a GREAT Day!
Rick Schwartz
PS> Want to easily look up and scan my last 200 posts back to 2007? Check out Domaining.com
EMIL @ KING.NET
I don’t care what other people think about my business. As long as it’s legal, I have no problem doing it over and over again.
They will not give me money if I listen to them, so why stop if this formula is working for me.
IMHO
Emil @ king.net
Kevin
Another interesting point is how so many domainers came from a telecom pay-per-call background. (976/800/900 number programs)
:)
James
And I thought that such jealousy was mainly a British thing brought about by the class system…one thing I always liked about America was that the masses used to appreciate others success; seems like thats eroding.
Bryan Gray
I agree completely. Mike’s words and Ron’s writing made for a very compelling piece. The industry is lucky to have them both.
Robbie
Its a great article, Mike is a true domain legend and his blog is a must read for anyone doing business.
Anon
I’ve heard it said before that it was during the Reagan/Thatcher era attitudes shifted from aspiring to do well to wishing to see others fail.
Ron W.
Great article about Mr. Berkens…I usually follow his blog on a daily basis because not only do he provide fresh insight into domains from an investors point-of-view, but he also covers all of the legal issues pertaining to domains!
huge
That is some good insight, and I love being involved in domains.
Steve C, Domainer for 12 years.
I will repeat the alarm I sent out a few days ago.
Wikipedia has the”Domainer” page redirected to”CyberSquatting” A lot of misinformation replacing hours of work I did on the Domainers page.
Please complain on Wikipedia. They are a huge source for the online community.
SteveC
iphones
that was one of the best articles hands down i have read this far from Dnjournal.
He just gets it.
UFO
Common people, lets be honest about the”American dream” it’s about working hard and getting just rewards. In effect effort = success.
Now, lets consider”sumlords” who add zero value to society, they are a bit like a protection racket, they simply engage in a transfer of wealth from those who rent to those who own. Landlords do not create more goods and services to society they actually (In Britain for definite) exploit the shortage of supply of housing in the market. Personally I’d line them up in front of firing squads.
Corporate raiders, well, lots of studies have been done and they haven’t found that they actually create more value in any form. They are just leveraged risky bets taken with excess fund managers’ money. They are motivated by self greed and hope to get their bonuses through slight of hand before the whole thing implodes.
Ambulance chasers, well, are these people creating a better society? Are they living up to the ideal of the American dream?
Domainers, have they lived up to the American dream? Those that have brought new and novel ideas to the market have; google, apple, yahoo, facebook etc etc and the others? Some of these others look like the ambulance chasers if you ask me, did they take virgin land and turn it into viable pasture? No?
So, I don’t think society has changed; they do congratulate those that achieve the American dream, the rest they can see through.
M. Menius
@SteveC -“… Wikipedia has the”Domainer” page redirected to”CyberSquatting”.
Steve, thanks for pointing that out. I have quickly edited”domaining” and”domainers”.
Stephen Douglas
Great article, showing both the expertise and dedication to the domain industry of Michael Berkens and Ron Jackson.
Both of their websites,”thedomains.com” for Mikey-B and”Dnjournal.com” for Rojack, are must reads for anyone wanting to invest in domaining.
M. Menius
OFF TOPIC, but important! SteveC (above) pointed out that Wikipedia is directing searches on”Domaining” and”Domainers” to their page on”Cybersquatting”. I have found myself stonewalled by Wikipedia admins when I tried to correct this. Andrew Alleman of Domain Name Wire has picked up the story, here: http://domainnamewire.com/2009/07/30/wikipedia-says-domainers-are-cybersquatters/
… and a discourse on the Wikipedia site has begun, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cybersquatting#Improper_redirect_of_Domaining_to_Cybersquatting
Quickly to sum up, one or two Wikipedia admins decided that Domainers are cybersquatters, and instead of leaving the”Domaining” page blank, took it upon themselves to equate Domaining with Cybersquatting. They refused to stop the redirection of Domaining to”Cybersquatting” and have demanded”reliable sources” and”Verifiability” that domaining is not cybersquatting.
Please feel free to get involved and express your side.
UFO
Ok, don’t seem to be able to elicit a negative response to my post so I’ll have to push the boat out further.
Domainers aren’t cybersquatters if their business model and domain valuation consists of future recurrent income streams.
However Domains are cybersquatters when their business model is predicated around gaining a supernormal profit due to a buyers necessity to by that name given lack of substitutes. Especially when the domains are are cashflow negative. If domainers were selling domains as a function of the income stream then this would be more akin to a business in trade.
However, I will qualify everything with the notion that generic names are not in my book cybersquatting irrespective of the intent for holding them. Also, someone holding say 100 or less names with the obvious intent to develop them (Shown by some of them being developed in a course of trade over time) is not a squatter either.
Companies who scraped the USPTO and other public registries for identifiable business names and marks should be prosecuted.