Was the $25k sale of Screensaver.com a great deal or a waste of money?

Yesterday the two-word .COM ScreenSaver.com sold for $25,099 on popular domain name marketplace NameJet. I’ll be honest, when I first saw this I thought, “wow, that’s a steal of a deal for such a solid domain.” Then I took a minute to think about it. Who uses screensavers?

When I first started using computers back in the mid-90’s screensavers were a must, if you didn’t use them you’d burn some stupid image or line of text onto your screen, forever. Growing up in Berkeley, the home of Berkeley Systems I was naturally a fan of After Dark.


Okay, so this software box might not ring a bell…but I can tell you that the image below will instantly ring a bell.


Yes – the flying toasters. For some reason these flying toasters with toast to match took the screensaver world by storm. I had it on both Macs and PCs for years and you probably did too. CRT screens needed screensavers, it was a real thing, a genuine need.

Then came the LCD screen and the need for a screensaver disappeared. This is one of those cases where a domain name actually loses value over time. At the same time I’m sure some people still use screensavers, I’m not sure there’s a market for people actually paying for them but I’m sure some people want to see something besides a black screen on their monitor, right?

So my question is, did the buyer of Screensaver.com get a steal of a deal or is $25k a waste of money since there really is no money to be made with screensavers any more? What do you think? Comment and let your voice be heard!

{ 18 comments… add one }

  • Michael June 2, 2017, 9:58 pm

    The person might have paid too much ! but the snappa.com people paid $40,000 for their domain and I think they paid too much too!

    here is some screen savers for sale.

    But wait now that global warming is now false people might start leaving their electronics on 24 hours a day like old times!! 🙂

  • Domain June 2, 2017, 10:23 pm

    Waste of money

  • steve brady June 2, 2017, 10:35 pm

    Screensaver.art is $1200.
    Screensaver.movie is $399
    Screensaver.live is $12

    Screensaver.news is taken. Suppose that concept is a switch to Doppler radar or the business report. At that point the saving lessens.

    Mine is set to go black after 5 minutes, instead of having the screen trip out on acid every time I pause from working.

  • Fake Election June 3, 2017, 12:30 am

    Yes a waste of money in this era, I used to like the pipes that kept building out in different angles on the screen

  • @domains June 3, 2017, 1:15 am

    Think new meanings for the term may be developed, not just the old screen savers we remember. Most internet connected devices have a screen after all.

    • John June 3, 2017, 8:17 am


      As in, just another expensive lottery ticket, only this time a lot more than $8.

  • John June 3, 2017, 8:16 am

    Total ridiculous waste of money. Almost worthless domain.

  • Matt June 3, 2017, 9:51 am

    Who was the buyer?

    • Brad Mugford June 3, 2017, 1:35 pm

      Frank Schilling. The guy who compared .COM to AM Radio…


  • Eric Lyon June 3, 2017, 1:13 pm

    Sadly, they over-spent. When I see investments like this one for that much money on obsolete, free, low-profit products, I have to wonder in the back of my head if it’s a money laundering/washing investment. I’m not saying it is, just that domains have become popular ways to clean money over the last decade and overspending by crazy amounts on is one of the red flags in identifying it. But then, one could also over-spend on a domain if the intention was to pay off a debt to someone they owed money to.

    You just never know these days. I always find over-spending on some domains interesting, even though most times, there’s no bad intentions and it’s all just chalked up as a conspiracy theory.

  • Brad June 3, 2017, 2:06 pm

    It has a great backlink profile and you guys never seem to consider the SEO value of domains. I don’t know if it’s worth 25K, but I think when you consider the SEO value as well as the domain side of things, they are in the ballpark. It would be a great domain to start a business on, but it would obviously need to be something different than the software screensaver. Then again, maybe a small % of the population still buys them and they could recoup some of their money by selling them. I wouldn’t say it was a waste of money although I wouldn’t have bought it.

  • George in Miami June 3, 2017, 5:41 pm

    I won’t be so categorical it’s a waste of money.
    Anyhow, he can blow much more than 25K without losing sleep.
    On the other hand, according to big G., shows 21.300K results with
    Adds all the way to page 5. He knows or is after something we, or at
    least, myself is missing.

  • Morgan June 3, 2017, 6:54 pm

    Someone on Twitter brought up the idea of a “screen saver” being a product or service that helps to fix smartphone screens…I can see that but I don’t think most people feel like their screens need “saving” after they break, I think they need “fixing”

  • João Neves June 4, 2017, 3:44 am


    My 4k 27″ phillips at work alerts me everytime I switch it on that if I let it on for more than 30min without activity it can burn the screen.. maybe there’s a need for screensavers on new 4k screens? Just wondering.

  • Braden Pollock June 4, 2017, 9:55 am

    “Screen fixer” is not memorable like “screen saver”. The name is brandable because it’s a common, memorable term. From a wholesale perspective, $25k is a bit on the high side but not ridiculous. To an end-user (who’s selling something other than a “screensaver”) this is a solid name.

  • Logan June 4, 2017, 5:25 pm

    It has nothing to do with fixing a screen, it has to do with preventing a screen from breaking in the first place — it saves your screen from damage. It could be a piece of film for your screen that sells for $19.95 on TV and the web.

  • Morgan June 4, 2017, 5:58 pm

    @Braden – agreed, “Screen Fixer” definitely doesn’t roll off the tongue like screen saver, and while I agree its memorable, I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of people hear this and think of screen saver software, not saving their smartphone screen.

    I think that’s my main issue with the name. It’s not that it couldn’t be used for a service that helps people fix/save their smartphone screen, it’s that the phrase “screen saver” means something completely different to most people.

  • Ryan Younger November 24, 2017, 8:48 am

    I was going to bid on this auction but decided not to in the end. I thought it would have gone for more, perhaps it would have if I bid.

    I own screensaver.io having won the auction for $115


Leave a Comment