Categorized | Parking

“Project Scalability” or Why Parking Is Not Going Anywhere

Posted on 20 September 2010 by Andrei

A lot of people constantly say things like “parking is dead”, “people will eventually switch to CPA” or “time to say goodbye to parking and develop our domains” but the truth is, parking is here to stay and the explanation is extremely, simple. It is so simple, in fact, that one word is more than enough to describe the way things stand: scalability.

“Andrei, You’re a Moron. I’ve Personally Had Success with CPA / Mass Development / Whatever”

I’m sure this is the first reaction quite a few of you have had when reading the first paragraph of this post. It’s an understandable reaction but I have just one question for you: how many domains have you “taken to the next level” through the method in question?

This is where it all stops and the truth is that nobody has managed to find a SCALABLE alternative to parking.

So you managed to successfully monetize one, two, ten or twenty domains via CPA, mass development or another method? That’s great and everything but until you can do it SUSTAINABLY with thousands of domains, you can’t say that you’ve discovered a scalable alternative to parking.

LOTS of Business Models Look Great on Paper

… but reality tends to sometimes disagree with us.

“Andrei, can’t we just forward each domain to a relevant CPA offer, then sit back and watch the profits come rolling in?”

This is an example of a business model which sounds great on paper and you can definitely do this successfully for a small-ish number of domains. But, unfortunately for you, there are quite a few factors which make this method anything but scalable:

1) Split testing until you find something that generates more revenue than parking is possible but if you’re doing it with thousands of domains, things tend to get complicated

2) Let’s not forget that scrubbing/shaving are an important part of the CPA game. If you think that you can simply sit back and relax once you’ve found something that works, you couldn’t be more wrong

3) Offers get pulled, advertisers leave and the list could go on and on. If you’re dealing with thousands of domains, keeping track of everything is let’s just say next to impossible

“But Andrei, can’t we just mass develop all of our domains?”

Show me one portfolio holder who has tried mass development on for size and who can prove (screenshots and the whole enchilada, not just words) that mass development has been a scalable solution which generated more in terms of profits than parking for his 1,000+ domains over a period of 2-3 years at the very least.

I’ve made it clear why mass development is not a viable long-term business model on more than one occasion, so there’s really no need to start explaining everything from A to Z again.

Is parking perfect? No and I’m sure I speak for every domainer when I say that I’d love to eventually see a scalable alternative to parking but right now, there just isn’t one. Knowing how to make the distinction between being optimistic and living in denial is extremely important, ’nuff said.

7 Comments For This Post

  1. Nick Says:

    Well said, I can relate to the part about cpa. it’s funny to see some domainers pretend to know everything about cpa even though they’ve never even worked with a network aside from maybe amazon before!

  2. b4u Says:

    If only there were more big feed choices than just two………………

  3. Yaron Says:

    I guess rob monster is one of the only guy who can really answer this question.

  4. LB Says:

    There’s nothing as convenient as parking for medium or large domain holdings. All it takes is a ns change and you start collecting money from your domains. Something fishy is happening on the road of the money from the company buying ppc ads to us. Maybe our efforts are better aimed at parking companies negotiating better cuts on our behalf?

  5. sorin Says:

    Andrei ,can you e’mail me about the parking?

  6. istanbul toursy Says:

    Well said, I can relate to the part about cpa. ://

  7. istanbul toursk Says:

    thanks for this article 😉