IT.COM

news Man purchased ClintonKaine.com domain name for $8 in 2011; he wants $90,000 to sell it

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

deez007

The More I Learn The Less I "Know"Top Member
Impact
12,971
(CNN) – Tucked away in a basement apartment in northeast Washington, a 28-year old federal contractor and lawyer, who creates web comics as hobby, hopes he’s sitting on a fortune.

He goes by the pen name “Jeremy Pegg” and as first reported by “DCIST”, he bought the domain name “clintonkaine.com” in 2011 for just eight dollars. So how did he predict this ticket five years ago?

Pegg explained, “Obama was looking at Kaine before he picked Biden and I don’t know, I felt like he was very likely going to be a running mate.”

Covering his bases, he also bought the “Clinton Biden” and “Clinton Booker” domain names and last year, he sold “cruz2016.com” and “bidenwarren.com” for $1,500 dollars each, but this might be his biggest real estate.

Since Clinton picked Kaine as her running mate, Pegg says he’s been getting huge web traffic and multiple interview requests.

Until he sells clintonkaine.com, he’s sharing his homemade comics on the webpage, depicting the democratic duo in a Harry Potter narrative.

Pegg said, “I’m pretty sure Clinton will win this election so the domain will keep being valuable for at least 4 years.”

He describes himself as very political, progressive, and who likes Sanders. Pegg goes on to say, “I have people suggesting I put links to the hacked DNC emails up there.”

He now supports Clinton, but does say he’s open to selling the domain name to Sanders, or even Trump supporters, whoever makes the best offer.

Pegg concludes with, “I don’t actually want to hurt the Clinton campaign, but I do want to sell the domain so we’ll see.”

Source: http://wwlp.com/2016/07/26/man-purchased-clintonkaine-domain-name-for-eight-dollars-in-2011/
 
11
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
I purchased ClinKaine.com last week, very little traffic and no requests for interviews.

I would consider selling it to Putin or the Chinese premier.
 
15
•••
This domain can easily fetch 10k right now.
 
0
•••
Really ? Who's going to buy it ? Why hasn't it sold yet ? Maybe I'm missing something, that's why I am asking.
 
2
•••
I could definitely see Trump buying it, just for the headlines.

And considering that tens of millions of dollars are being spent on both sides, this domain could actually be a great purchase even at 6 or 7 figures.

Then again, the owner may hold out for such a sum, and miss out on a chance to sell for $10K or $50K. Hard to say!
 
4
•••
With some salesmanship he could get $100k for it easily.

I won't make it easy by laying out the details why, but if you think about it hard enough you can come up with a few strong pitches for why paying six figures for less than 17 weeks of use makes sense.
 
0
•••
Whether he can cash in or not... what I like about this guy is that he has a pretty good sense of prediction. Well, at least he got it right this time.

Although his interest in politics helped.
 
5
•••
Owner of ClintonKaine.com checking in.

It is so hard to predict what I'll actually get for this domain. I got a genuine offer for $10,000 by email, and I got an offer on Flippa for $30,000 that I'm not 100% sure was legitimate. Regardless, I'm not ready to accept $30,000 yet and I raised the minimum bid on Flippa to $60,000. We'll see what actually ends up happening.
 
16
•••
Owner of ClintonKaine.com checking in.

It is so hard to predict what I'll actually get for this domain. I got a genuine offer for $10,000 by email, and I got an offer on Flippa for $30,000 that I'm not 100% sure was legitimate. Regardless, I'm not ready to accept $30,000 yet and I raised the minimum bid on Flippa to $60,000. We'll see what actually ends up happening.

For a genuine offer of $10K I would have ripped their arm off to get the money but that's just me. Would not trust any bids over $ 100 on Flippa, but then that's just me.

Hope your waiting pays off although the skeptic in me is not so confident. I have had no interest at all in the poor man's version but I do have a good Hillary related name, but just a speculative punt.
 
Last edited:
4
•••
Owner of ClintonKaine.com checking in.

It is so hard to predict what I'll actually get for this domain. I got a genuine offer for $10,000 by email, and I got an offer on Flippa for $30,000 that I'm not 100% sure was legitimate. Regardless, I'm not ready to accept $30,000 yet and I raised the minimum bid on Flippa to $60,000. We'll see what actually ends up happening.

Hello Jeremy... Welcome to NamePros!

Best of luck with this domain.

If you haven't all ready, do your homework, and try to uncover any data points you can use as a sell point.

Note the price of TrumpPence.com.

upload_2016-7-28_17-44-36.png


You seem to understand that an asking price isn't necessarily the BIN price. That said, your asking price of $90,000 (per thread title) is only 18% of TrumpPence ;)

Here's an article regarding the owner of PresidentTrump.com turning down a 5 figure offer. Article Credit @equity78

@Joe Styler and I talked about political domains during the NamePros member meet up at NamesCon. Perhaps, he may be able to lend some outreach ideas.

Have you considered adding the domain to AfterNic? With social media these days, anyone searching GoDaddy for ClintonKaine.com could see a for sale price, and spur even more visibility.

upload_2016-7-28_17-58-51.png


It could say, ClintonKaine.com for sale at XX,XXX. And/or you could give AfterNic your BIN price / lowest price you're willing to accept if you aren't sure of the BIN price.
 
Last edited:
2
•••
0
•••

The comment section in the above quoted link beats this woman up for turning down a 5 figure offer for PresidentTrump.com

Mentioned in comments:

Story of BernieSanders.com given to Senator for free by supporter. HERE

Story of RandPaul.com purchased for 100k HERE

UDRP (as Trump is no stranger to that, see TrumpCard.com) HERE

Story about 2016 political domain names written in 2014 for sale HERE

 
Last edited:
2
•••
Why do we all the sudden change the tone from condoning this type of behavior when the owner steps in?

Cyber squatter is cyber squatter.
 
2
•••
Why do we all the sudden change the tone from condoning this type of behavior when the owner steps in?

How has the tone changed since the owner introduced himself to NamePros?
 
2
•••
How has the tone changed since the owner introduced himself to NamePros?
For as long as I've been a member, there have been countless threads (more so in the appraisal section) criticizing the act of cyber squatting. This is the first thread I've run across where said cyber squatter introduces themselves and the whole atmosphere changes from "you shouldn't do that" to "congrats, good luck".
 
0
•••
For as long as I've been a member, there have been countless threads (more so in the appraisal section) criticizing the act of cyber squatting. This is the first thread I've run across where said cyber squatter introduces themselves and the whole atmosphere changes from "you shouldn't do that" to "congrats, good luck".

I see your point, though, that's not entirely accurate pertaining to this thread.

Nobody mentioned 'you shouldn't do that' before the domain owner joined NP and entered this conversation.

@David Walker given that you're an experienced moderator, What do you think the best course of action for @CoalToNewCastle to do with ClintonKaine.com?
 
1
•••
I see your point, though, that's not entirely accurate pertaining to this thread.
It's completely accurate when it pertains to domaining in general. Is this a situational scenario that I'm unaware of?
@David Walker given that you're an experienced moderator, What do you think the best course of action for @CoalToNewCastle to do with ClintonKaine.com?
What does being a moderator of a forum have to do with this? Can I not have a personal opinion? Though, I'm not going to offer any advice, as I have none to give.

Look, I'm not here to butt heads with you. I merely posted this as an educational piece referring back to my answer to your first question: When it comes to domaining, cyber squatting or purchasing names, has generally been looked down upon. When we have characters like this who pop up with a success story, the whole tide turns; people will think they will be the lucky one and become copy cats. I've seen it, I've been around a while now.
 
3
•••
It's completely accurate when it pertains to domaining in general. Is this a situational scenario that I'm unaware of?

Maybe, maybe not. He's a political cartoonist. Does he have to sell the domain, or could he benefit from promoting his own political comics?

He said he wants to sell the domain, though, as a Hillary supporter, he has the option to follow in the footsteps of a Bernie supporter and gift the domain for a greater cause should he choose.

What does being a moderator of a forum have to do with this? Can I not have a personal opinion? Though, I'm not going to offer any advice, as I have none to give.

You have every right to your opinion, and as a mod, that opinion weighs a little more to newbie NamePros members. I'm not trying to butt heads either, I just don't understand disliking somebody's very first NamePros post. Seems more reactive than proactive.

Look, I'm not here to butt heads with you. I merely posted this as an educational piece referring back to my answer to your first question: When it comes to domaining, cyber squatting or purchasing names, has generally been looked down upon. When we have characters like this who pop up with a success story, the whole tide turns; people will think they will be the lucky one and become copy cats. I've seen it, I've been around a while now.


Good points...
 
5
•••
You have every right to your opinion, and as a mod, that opinion weighs a little more to newbie NamePros members. I'm not trying to butt heads either, I just don't understand disliking somebody's very first NamePros post. Seems more reactive than proactive.
Let me first welcome @CoalToNewCastle to NamePros. Next, I'll state that "dislike" wasn't a personal attack.
Proper usage of the dislike button: https://www.namepros.com/threads/get-rid-of-dislike-button.941009/#post-5482151 (simply put, something that is not liked)
 
Last edited:
3
•••
Cyber squatter is cyber squatter.
This is not cybersquatting. Incorrectly labeling someone as a cybersquatter is a worse offense, in my eyes, than actually being a cybersquatter. While I disapprove of both, you should get your facts straight:
  1. No one owns a trademark for "ClintonKaine" or "Clinton Kaine"
  2. He registered the domain name in 2011 before the pair teamed up
  3. He is using it in a perfectly valid and legal way that even if there was a trademark, his use of the domain name would not be infringing on their rights, and he'd be fully within his legal rights to do so.
Your accusation is completely off base and inappropriate.
 
14
•••
@Addison, thank you for your reply. I believe that this specific name is in the gray area for cybersquatting. The reason being is simply the registrants intent on selling the domain as opposed to keeping it and putting his artwork on it. The second reason is the definition of "trademark":
a symbol, word, or words legally registered or established by use as representing a company or product.
Source: Google

The product being the future presidency of the United States. When Clinton accepted the nomination and selected Kaine as her running mate, it in turn then made it an 'established' mark representing the two; I believe that this is an arguable stance as one cannot register a trademark such as this prior to a campaign being initiated and selection. But, I am not a lawyer and certainly don't specialize in trademark law.

It would be interesting to see what @Jason @ ESQwire would have to say about this. Due to the nature of the two parties involved (Clinton and Kaine), I think it could be an easy win and would set future presidence in this type of case to where it would no longer be questionable. Though, I think she has bigger fish to fry at this time. We'll see though...

If he (or any other lawyer) would state that this isn't a case that could be won, I will apologize. As it stands now, I consider this cybersquatting as two items have been met: 1) intent and 2) infringement on an established mark.
 
Last edited:
2
•••
The only people that can considered this name as trademark, infringement and cybersquatting are those people name registered. Other can just chill and hope your pick will win :)

If I had own this domain, I would say if someone will buy it, it's fine; or I can just donate this name to Hillary or Tim. Either way, if they win this name can be used as part of 2016 historic presidential.
Who ever wins, maybe the book writer will purchased all those presidential domain names that are registered. They will become the historical domain names presidential name registered; but only the catche once. We will know the winner in 11/08/16? Good luck to all candidates. Hope you win :)

Hint: I also purchased a presidential domain names; because I want them to win. It's my way of supporting them.
 
Last edited:
2
•••
Owner of ClintonKaine.com checking in.

It is so hard to predict what I'll actually get for this domain. I got a genuine offer for $10,000 by email, and I got an offer on Flippa for $30,000 that I'm not 100% sure was legitimate. Regardless, I'm not ready to accept $30,000 yet and I raised the minimum bid on Flippa to $60,000. We'll see what actually ends up happening.

@CoalToNewCastle , nice to see you here!

This story is being getting picked up now.

Reddit could pick up your domain story and all hell can break loose in a good way.

It could spike in the weeks and months to come.

Hope you make a killing :)

Well done and best wishes!
 
1
•••
This is not cybersquatting. Incorrectly labeling someone as a cybersquatter is a worse offense, in my eyes, than actually being a cybersquatter. While I disapprove of both, you should get your facts straight:
  1. No one owns a trademark for "ClintonKaine" or "Clinton Kaine"
  2. He registered the domain name in 2011 before the pair teamed up
  3. He is using it in a perfectly valid and legal way that even if there was a trademark, his use of the domain name would not be infringing on their rights, and he'd be fully within his legal rights to do so.
Your accusation is completely off base and inappropriate.

I agree @David Walker has a point about cybersquatting, I however, think @Addison is right in the context of this particular case. @Grilled makes some valid observations too.

I give @CoalToNewCastle full marks for his political intuition, trendspotting, foresight & prediction.

Remarkable to say the least.

Also this thread is beginning to get interesting!
 
Last edited:
4
•••
Last edited:
0
•••
Back