domains James Booth sells Galatea.com for $275K

[equity78]

James Booth posted on Twitter/X that he sold Galatea.com for $275,000. A name from Greek Mythology you can read more here. There is a developed website on GetGalatea.com. They describe themselves as the world’s fastest-growing reading app. Congrats to James


Read More

 

[Kyle Tully]

Why are you splitting it in Gala + Tea !?
Galatea is a single word
Here in Europe is widely known

Hmmm I wonder if that explains why there are 726 companies using it in their name

No that can’t be it. There must be 725 infringers on gala tea!

 

[branding]

Hmmm I wonder if that explains why there are 726 companies using it in their name

No that can’t be it. There must be 725 infringers on gala tea!

Even if selling tea, the brand would be gala. Tea would just be a suffix. Ridiculous.

Very generic in most part of the world.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

#SpillTheGalatea

Spoiler: Hot Tea

Spoiler: Epilepsy Warning

 

[MKA]

The price seems fair. It got me a bit curious about athena.com (Athena being the Greek goddess of wisdom, warfare, and handicraft) and apparently it hosts a cheap-looking blog, and in the footnote there's a "athena.com is not for sale." I imagine he's gotten quite a few offers.

 

[Jannes]

The price seems fair. It got me a bit curious about athena.com (Athena being the Greek goddess of wisdom, warfare, and handicraft) and apparently it hosts a cheap-looking blog, and in the footnote there's a "athena.com is not for sale." I imagine he's gotten quite a few offers.

on About page:

No, athena.com is not for sale. Really. Even if your girlfriend's name is Athena. Even if you have a cool start-up that you really can't tell me about but that would benefit from the domain. Even if you are an entrepreneur like me. No, I'm not interested in discussing why. Sorry for sounding like a jerk about it, but I get a couple of requests per week to sell the domain and I've been saying "no" for 30 years. It's not likely that I'll say "yes" to you.

And, really. Just don't ask.

reverse psychology?

 

[MKA]

on About page:

reverse psychology?

There are people that are not interested in selling their domains. I wouldn't be surprised if he said no even if you threw him an eight-figure offer.

I made a $40,000 offer (after a few lower offers) on a domain that was used for a redirect to a small business with almost no traffic, and that most people here would consider a "reg fee" domain. The owner rejected the $40,000 offer and didn't even want to negotiate. In fact I think he ended up blocking my email after I asked him what he wanted for it a few too many times.

 

[Jannes]

Yeah, actually reminds me of Michael Saylor's now well-known stance before selling voice.com for $30M:

In the recent interview with Anthony Pompliano, Co-founder of Morgan Creek Digital, Saylor shared his story about the sale, which happened sometime around June 20, 2019. According to him, the initial offer was just USD 150,000 but he didn’t get on the call with the buyers until the offer was raised up to around USD 22 million.

“Selling intangible assets like artwork, it all comes down to how much are they worth to you. So if you needed the 10 million dollars you would have taken the 10 million dollars but at this point, you know, I have 500 million dollars of cash in the bank, and I love my things, you know, maybe you can tell that I’m a little bit passionate about some of this stuff. So I would rather own it and not have the 10 million then sell it for that so I said no,” the CEO said.

“I said this is like my daughter: I’ll marry her off but only to a man that’s going to treat her better than I will treat her. So if you guys really value this, then give me the 30 million otherwise I’m keeping it,” Saylor said, adding that “the word ‘voice’ in the English language is worth a hundred million.”

https://cryptonews.com/news/from-usd-150k-to-30m-how-microstrategy-ceo-sold-voice-com-to-7742.htm

edit: never mind

 

[Future Sensors]

reverse psychology?

Crypto.com had a similar message, but the owner sold the domain eventually.

 

[MKA]

Crypto.com had a similar message, but the owner sold the domain eventually.

It's always difficult to say, because even though you may not want to sell the domain, when that eight-figure offer hits the table you're going to take a moment to reconsider.

 

[Acroplex]

Gala (γάλα) is Greek for milk. The galaxy (γαλαξίας) is the depiction of milk droplets spread across the sky. It's how the ancient Greeks perceived the world in their mythology.

While extremely rare as a first name, I went to school with a girl name Galatea (Γαλάτεια) which also means the alternate spelling of Galateia is possible (e+i equals "ee" in Greek; so does o+i together.)

That being said, a generic term such as Galatea's name might become a trademark. It is very hard, however, to establish a case in a UDRP where the term involved originates as a generic. It's necessary for the brand to have acquired a secondary meaning and this happens after years in existence and widespread recognition.

Back to the sale; I'm seeing a quick flip as the domain wasn't owned by James until past March 1st. So James must have gone in and gone out based on some insider info. Publishing the selling price means that the buyer didn't care about an NDA.

 

[Sperry8]

you cannot be serious. This is nothing about Gala and Tea The name Galatea comes from Greek Mythology. With it's own Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galatea_(mythology)

Secondly you believe that if someone registered a domain name in 1995 that if 25 years later someone named their business that, they get the name for free. They just send an email and say "Hey I know you owned this name before I was born, but I just named my Startup this and fully registered as a business, you now need to give me this name?"

Agree 100%. Someone cannot just come later and say now I own the word - even for people using it before I started. that is what Meta (Facebook) is trying to do with the word Meta and it is wrong. I disagree with keith 100%

 

[Sperry8]

The price seems fair. It got me a bit curious about athena.com (Athena being the Greek goddess of wisdom, warfare, and handicraft) and apparently it hosts a cheap-looking blog, and in the footnote there's a "athena.com is not for sale." I imagine he's gotten quite a few offers.

I think the price is outrageous (but hey, kudos to the seller!). I never even heard of the term galatea prior to this sale. And this branding is such that it's worth this amount? Crazy talk. Could've bought a LLLL word for less.

 

[Kyle Tully]

I think the price is outrageous (but hey, kudos to the seller!). I never even heard of the term galatea prior to this sale.

And yet in other parts of the world it’s a very common term with hundreds of businesses branding themselves around it.

It’s almost as if domain name valuations don’t revolve around you.

 

[Acroplex]

Galatea is surprisingly taken in at least 105 TLDs but I would not call it common. Odd eh?
BTW it's pronounced "yah-LAH-tee-ah" in Greek, not "gah-LAY-she-ah"

 

[rh2000]

Back to the sale; I'm seeing a quick flip as the domain wasn't owned by James until past March 1st. So James must have gone in and gone out based on some insider info. Publishing the selling price means that the buyer didn't care about an NDA.

Wow. If he just got the domain this past March and sold it this quick, he definitely had some insider information. Or he is one lucky man.

 

[jberryhill]

Can anyone explain how gala and tea combined is generic?

One of the things that drives me batty in these discussions, though, is the use of a term like "generic" in isolation from any application of the word or phrase in question.

Typically, the discussion is about whether something is, or is not, a "dictionary word" - i.e. a word or phrase having a primary meaning of some kind independent of a secondary meaning as a trademark.

When you hear the word "generic", a little bell should go off in your head with the sound of "...for what?" indicating that when we talk about 'generic' in trademark law, then we mean whether it is generic for a specified set of goods or services, or not.

Take the word "Monster". Is it "generic"? (see note 1 below)

The word "monster" is generic for scary or dangerous creatures of some kind.

The word "monster" is NOT GENERIC for an energy drink. It is in fact a well known trademark for an energy drink.

So, the point here is that you can't say as some kind of absolute proposition that "'monster' is generic" or "'monster' is not generic" without completing the question "generic for what?"

Now, most of the interesting domain disputes - the bulk of ones I have spent waaaaay too many years defending - have involved a domain name based on some kind of 'dictionary word', phrase, surname, geographic location, etc. versus someone having a trademark that is identical or confusingly similar to that domain name.

Just looking at decisions I have obtained in the first three months of this year:

transco.com	WIPO D2024-0061	2024-03-19	Complaint denied
pitstop.com	WIPO D2023-5318	2024-03-14	Complaint denied
toros.com	WIPO D2023-5383	2024-03-01	Complaint denied
malo.com	WIPO D2023-5063	2024-01-31	Complaint denied
credable.com	WIPO D2023-4724	2024-01-24	Complaint denied

Every single one of them involved a complainant who has a perfectly good trademark of some kind.

Credable is a financial business in India. It is also a homonym of the dictionary word "credible". The panel decided, based on the evidence presented by both sides, that it was more likely than not that the respondent registered the domain name because it sounds like "credible" than because of the complainant's mark.

Malo is a well-known mark for cashmere fabric and clothing in Italy. It is also the Spanish masculine adjective for "bad" but, more to the point, is the domain registrant's own last name. The panel decided, based on the evidence presented by both sides, that it was more likely than not registered because it was his last name.

Toros is the largest fertilizer company in Turkey. It is also the Spanish dictionary word for "bulls". The panel decided, based on the evidence... you get the idea... Same thing for both Pitstop and Transco.

I have two pending right now - waterland.com and because.com - I am hopeful there will be similar results.

But, and I want to make this clear, in EVERY single one of these cases, and these are just my cases for the first three months of 2024, there was no argument about whether the Complainant had a distinctive trademark for whatever it is they do. There was no argument that the Complainant "can't have a trademark on a dictionary word" - most of the best trademarks ARE dictionary words - "Bud", "Coke", "Tide", "Ford", "Amazon", all have dictionary meanings. But it's not meaningful to talk about whether "bud is generic" without specifying if you are talking about friends or beer. You can have a Bud with your bud, but those are two different things.

I would assume that a company shelling out tall bucks for a domain name has likely already obtained an opinion on their alternatives. Nobody is going to pay six figures for a domain name if their lawyer is confident they can get it for four figures in a UDRP, and they probably base that determination on a deep look into the facts, and whether the totality of the circumstances adds up to a conclusion that the domain name was registered because of the trademark claim or not.

That's why, whenever a wave of the "stupid virus" hits Namepros, like "Libra" and then "Diem", I try to point out that registering a bunch of domain names right after a press announcement of a future product, etc., and then arguing "but its a dictionary word" is a transparently poor approach. Saying "but Libra is an astrological sign" to justify five domains registered the day after the Facebook announcement, when you somehow went on a "Libra" binge, but surprisingly don't have any "Capricorn" or "Taurus" domains, is not a persuasive set of facts.

So, yes, "Galatea" is a "dictionary word" albeit not a commonly used one. But it is "generic for something". Whether it was registered because of a trademark or an expected trademark, what evidence there might be for or against that proposition, and what the likely timeline or outcome of an alternative to purchasing it would be, is apparently a calculation that the purchaser made.

But that, in a nutshell, is the vast majority of "interesting" UDRP cases. They seldom turn on whether or not there is a trademark, or if the word or phrase in question is "generic" in a vacuum. They turn on what the evidence shows was or was not the probable motivation of the Respondent in having acquired the domain name. But, in the federal appeals circuit that includes the jurisdiction governing GoDaddy, Namesilo, Namecheap, and several other registrars, the original registration date can control the outcome. The way the relevant US law is interpreted in that circuit is different from UDRP outcomes, which can be controlled by when the current registrant obtained the domain name. Again, a trademark owner deciding whether to purchase or dispute a domain name needs to take into account the likelihood of success in a UDRP and the likelihood of the domain registrant (a) filing a further proceeding, and (b) prevailing in that proceeding.

I have no idea what the specific circumstances involving this mark and this domain name might happen to be. Nor do I care. But I do hope that my usual rant about what "generic" means, and how it means nothing absent context of "for what" may have reached someone who hasn't heard it from me a hundred times already.

(note 1) It is also generic for "A registrar CEO who lies and steals customers' escrow deposits."

 

[DomainNature]

Wow. If he just got the domain this past March and sold it this quick, he definitely had some insider information. Or he is one lucky man.

Most of this type of big sales are insider squat info. IMO

 

[Kyle Tully]

Most of this type of big sales are insider squat info. IMO

Perhaps he is just paying more attention than most.

Posted in Feb:

https://www.booksandpublishing.com....rm-secures-funding-for-ai-powered-publishing/

 

[MKA]

I think the price is outrageous (but hey, kudos to the seller!). I never even heard of the term galatea prior to this sale. And this branding is such that it's worth this amount? Crazy talk. Could've bought a LLLL word for less.

Galatea.com is memorable and sounds sophisticated. So why waste the money on a soulless alphabet soup of a domain that would be hard to remember?

The use-cases for LLLL.com are extremely limited outside of China, because of the abbreviated pin system.

 

[pb]

trademark that is identical or confusingly similar to that domain name

I love how you put these words in this exact order.

 

[Sperry8]

Galatea.com is memorable and sounds sophisticated. So why waste the money on a soulless alphabet soup of a domain that would be hard to remember?

The use-cases for LLLL.com are extremely limited outside of China, because of the abbreviated pin system.

Etsy, Ebay, Uber, Lyft, Line, Bolt... the LLLL list goes on. To me (and I get that others find Galatea.com memorable), I'd rather spend $100k on the LLLL names (like the ones above) rather than $275k on Galatea. But clearly the buyer is happy.

 

[MKA]

Etsy, Ebay, Uber, Lyft, Line, Bolt... the LLLL list goes on. To me (and I get that others find Galatea.com memorable), I'd rather spend $100k on the LLLL names (like the ones above) rather than $275k on Galatea. But clearly the buyer is happy.

Uber.com, line.com, and bolt.com are both four-letter domains, but also (and more importantly) they're generic domains. Not to mention that bolt.com and line.com would likely in the seven figures.

Etsy and Ebay on the other hand are pure four-letter domains. And I would argue that neither of the domains are inherently good, it's just that they had good business models, just like Google. The point is that these are exceptions to the rule. If Ebay had been hermes.com instead I think they would've had an easier time to market themselves in the early stages.

 

[Kyle Tully]

Etsy, Ebay, Uber, Lyft, Line, Bolt... the LLLL list goes on. To me (and I get that others find Galatea.com memorable), I'd rather spend $100k on the LLLL names (like the ones above) rather than $275k on Galatea. But clearly the buyer is happy.

MKA nailed the response but forgot one important thing, they were already branded on Galatea this was just a domain upgrade.

So if they wanted to move to something “better” like “bolt” they would be up for 7-figures for the name and another 6 figures in a rebranding process.

 

[jberryhill]

Wow. If he just got the domain this past March and sold it this quick, he definitely had some insider information. Or he is one lucky man.

If there are 38 slots on the roulette wheel, and you have chips on 19 of them, you're going to win half the time.

Complainants make "timing" arguments in a lot of UDRP disputes. The flipside of what I mentioned above about timing is that because it is a popular form of "bad faith registration argument", sometimes the actual facts go in another direction.

For example, the complaint will say, "we had a press release on June 5, and the domain name was registered on June 7". Looks suspicious, eh?

But then, the actual facts show that the name had expired weeks before, run through the grace period etc., and was already on auction or in pendingdelete by June 5. Another common fact pattern is that the name was part of a portfolio sale of NNNN domain names which had been in negotiation for weeks before the sale.

Save your receipts, folks. Always save your receipts. Don't just save the ones you think you'll need, because you never know which ones those are going to be.

 

[biggie]

"stupid virus"

Hi

even though i'm vaccinated, i still try to keep my mask on, so i won't catch it.

great explanation as well!

(note 1)

Hi

lol, i was thinking same thing,
which btw, happened because so many had caught the vapors.

imo...