Evaluating Different Kinds of LLLL.IN Names — Part-3

In this third part, let us look at AAAB, ABBB, ABBA, and AABB patterns. The prior parts, part 1 can be found here, part 2 can be found here.

All the patterns mentioned above except ABBA are all registered as of scan done 15-20 days back. It might also be possible that even all ABBA are registered. As noted previously, the taken pattern follow the prices commanded by LLLL.COMs and hence these are eagerly picked up. The thing about ABBA names is that if the A is a consonant and B turns out to be a vowel, then the name can be easily pronounceable. Examples of these names are BAAB.in, MOOM.in, PEEP.in, etc.

The total number of different AAAB.in patterns: Doing the math we get 26 X 25 (650) combinations. These can be found here.

The total number of different ABBB.in patterns: Doing the maths we get 26 X 25 (650) combinations. These can be found here.

The total number of different AABB.in patterns: Doing the maths we get 26 X 25 (650) combinations. These can be found here.

The total number of different ABBA.in patterns: Doing the maths we get 26 X 25 (650) combinations. These can be found here.

Unfortunately, the above patterns can be either fall into only one of the buckets only. So, what that means is that if a name is AAAB, it cannot be any of ABBB, AABB or ABBA. This leads to a rather bland Venn diagram which I will not even bother posting.

Evaluating Different Kinds of LLLL.IN Names — Part 2

In the second part of the series, I intend to pick a few types of LLLL.INs and delve into detail. The first part of the series is here.

Let’s look at CVCV, VCVC and ABAB types of .IN names here. As you are aware CVCV are highly sought after type in the LLL.IN space. The reasons for this is because of alternating consonants and vowels which lend itself to be easily pronounceable, and hence brandable. Similarly, VCVC are also pronounceable. While there is a strong CVCV.IN buyout, we don’t have a VCVC buyout, yet. You can see the available names here. I’m not sure what the reason is, but I would like to theorize that this could be because CVCV.COMs are highly valued domains and the general trend of what could be good for .COM is also deemed effectual for .IN might apply here.

The total number of different CVCV combinations: Doing the maths, we get 21 x 5 x 21 x 5 = 11,025 different combinations of CVCV names. Download the combination here.

The total number of different VCVC combinations: Doing the maths, we get 5 x 21 x 5 x 21= 11,025 different combinations of VCVC names. Download the combination here.

ABAB is an interesting pattern. Not all of them are easily pronounceable
but because of the brandable potential and rarity, these are all registered.

The total number of different ABAB names: Doing the maths, we get 26 x 25 = 650 different combinations of ABAB names. Download the combination here.

Now, a domain can be both a CVCV and ABAB, for example, DODO or PAPA, etc. Similarly, there are VCVC and ABAB names like OTOT, EMEM, etc.

The total number of CVCV and ABAB names: Doing the maths, we get 21 x 5 = 105 different combinations of names that are both CVCV and ABAB. Download the combination here.

The total number of VCVC and ABAB names: Doing the maths, we get 5 x 21 = 105 different combinations of names that are both VCVC and ABAB. Download the combination here.

Check out the Venn diagram for the above the types — CVCV, VCVC, and ABAB here:

Intersection of CVCV, VCVC and ABAB type of LLLL.IN domains


Study of Dropped LLL.INs

In one of the previous posts, we observed that since the last LLL.in buyout, fewer and fewer LLL.INs are getting dropped. This is a good thing for the stability of LLL.INs and price increase.

In this post, we’ll take a dive into what kinds of LLL.INs are dropping. Before we put up stats, let’s get some nomenclature out of the way so that we are all on the same page. If you have been domaining for some time, you would have undoubtedly heard the terms like western premium, chips, etc. Let’s refresh this again for the benefit for all:

  • Western Premiums: Usually for LLL and LLLL names where each letter comprises of ABCDEFGHLMNOPRST only.
  • CHIPS: Stands for CHInese PremiumS, and contains alphabets, that does NOT include AEIOU and V
  • Indian Premiums: Since Indian domain market is still in its infancy there is no name assigned to India Premiums akin to CHIPS for the Chinese Market. But that does not mean that there Western Premium and Indian Premium alphabets exactly are the same. Based on common usage of certain alphabets in Indian languages, it has been observed that K and V, in addition to the Western Premium alphabets are considered are common and can be construed as Indian Premiums. So the alphabets that form Indian Premiums are ABCDEFGHKLMNOPRSTV.

Now since the naming convention & terminologies are all ironed out, let’s dive into stats. But, before I dive into the stats, just a note on data that is used to pull the stats:

  1. The LLL.IN dropping stats were regularly collected since mid-2008. So we have about eight years of solid data.
  2. A LLL.IN name was assumed to be dropping if it was in PENDING DELETE RESTORABLE or PENDING DELETE SCHEDULED FOR RELEASE state. In the former, it is possible that the name could have been restored & hence did not drop. Such cases although possible are very very small in number, and although the raw numbers change because of that, the conclusions derived from the stats will not be impacted by minor noise or edge cases.

Finally, all the preliminary points are covered, here is the first table:

Number of Times a LLL.IN Has DroppedNumber of Different LLL.Ins

The first column is the number of times a LLL.IN has dropped over eight years. So for example say a name like JTQ.IN was dropped in 2010 and registered after it was dropped, but it was again dropped in 2014, this name would be part of “2” in this column. The second column is the total count of all unique names that dropped. So basically we are trying to see how many different LLL.INs dropped over eight years and how many times did they drop. As evident from the table above, ~5000 names dropped at least once in the course of eight years. Another observation is that fewer and fewer names having been dropping multiple times. Three of the names dropped seven times in the last eight years. The names were — AFZ.IN, MGZ.IN and VDU.IN.

Remember, we talked about Western Premium, etc. above, the reason we talked about it because of the next chart:

The chart puts the dropped LLL.IN names into categories so that we can see how they fared. Clearly, you can discern that there is a huge difference between Premiums (Indian + Western) and Others. Most of the Western Premiums that dropped the first time had NOT been dropped again. No Western Premium LLL.in has dropped more than two times. There is a drop off in Indian Premium names as well, and there are fewer Indian Premium names that have dropped several times.

Registrant’s Country Breakdown for NNN.in, NNNN.in, and LLL.in

In one of our previous posts — we listed the breakdown of registrant’s country of origin for LLLL.in domain. In this post, I’ll list out the registrant’s country for the three categories which there is a firm buyout.

All these stats are based on the scan I completed around May 27th, 2016. So here are the breakdown for LLL.ins (Hover over the maps to see more details) :

Based on the above map, you would see that US and India dominate the LLL.in space. Right now owners of LLL.INs are spread across 80 countries. However, I have shown only the countries that have a size-able volume of LLL.in registration. Now, drilling down to US-State level breakdown of LLL.IN registration:

The reason I choose the US is that that’s where maximum LLL.in registrants are from and also the data about states is pretty consistent. I’ll do another post about which states in India contribute to the maximum number of LLL.IN registration in a week or two. Also, I have shown the top states only (with 25 or more registrations). Here is my analysis of the map above:

  1. Most of the registrations of LLL.IN domains are from the small area call DMV (DC-Maryland-Virginia). This area accounts for over 50% of the LLL.IN registrations. Since the map is small, if you hover over the north part of Virginia, you will see DC contributing a significant chunk.
  2. The East side of the US has a lot of states with extensive registrations.
  3. The state with silicon valley and the largest state does not contribute a whole lot yet.
  4. As you see most of the registrations in the middle of US is sparse.

Now over to NNN.in , here is the map showing top countries:

UK and China top this category of names. All are aware of the Chinese love for numeric domains.

Over to NNNN.INs where we recently had a buyout. Here is the distribution of top countries:

China leads by a huge margin and also the driver of the buyout. The next country is Iran, which is very surprising.

Another thing I wanted to do was combine the distribution of NNN.IN and NNNN.IN domains. Here it is:

Nothing surprising here. And to the last graph of coupling LLL.INs, NNN.INs and NNNN.INs:

So, as you see, many countries outside India have invested in short .IN domains. The registrants outside India hold significant portfolio sizes which obviously helps in increasing the contribution from those countries, and unless there are significant inter-country large buyouts these number would not change a lot.

Downward Trend in Dropping LLL.INs

We are in either golden period of LLL.IN buyout or a drought based on which side of the equation you stand. If you like to register dropping LLL.INs, the phase is akin to a bad monsoon. However, if you have invested in LLL.INs, the period is a harbinger of things to come.

As usual, my first paragraph is backed by solid data as evidence. So here is the graph from data collected as far back as mid-2008.

dropping LLL.IN
On the x-axis, is the year and month. On the y-axis, you can see the count of dropping LLL.INs in any given month. Let me give you an insight on how I arrived at the number of dropping LLL.in in a month. Since I do a scan every month, the number of dropping LLL.INs  for a month are ALL domains that are in PENDING DELETE or PENDING DELETE RESTORABLE state and scheduled to drop in that month. There is a chance that domains that can be “Restorable” could have been restored and would affect the accuracy of the numbers. But, this case is so uncommon that, you can ignore it as noise and does not impact the analysis of the graph I am about to provide.

So what does this mean for LLL.INs in general, if you have followed my previous post on LLL.IN buyout, the conclusion you can derive from the above is that LLL.IN buyout is here to stay and as LLL.IN domains are spread across various domainers/investors, there will be fewer and fewer drops of LLL.INs. We would soon reach a point like what has happened to LLL.COMs and LLL.IN drops would be fewer and far between. Finally, I sound like a broken record, but the time to buy LLL.IN is now!!!