Comments on: Why Hersheys Didn’t Buy Candy.com

By: Stephen Douglas

Stephen Douglas — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:36:08 +0000

@ Chip — nice write up, and you are a lucky dog! Stay the course and reap the harvest, cuz I know you’re going to be burping rainbows soon, broey!

@ Chris Desouza – I know about 25 potential candidates that can push a company towards some great online results through domaining smarts. They are full of “it”… the “it factor”, and they “get it”.

By: Chris Desouza

Chris Desouza — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 01:12:37 +0000

Friggin Domainers have answers for every problem. Guess how many domainers can get employed at Hershey’s to turn their crappy MBA infested staff see the light?

Domainers are full of it.

By: Chip

Chip — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:04:28 +0000

As an investor in chocolate.com, I’m happy to see the flurry of activity in the arena. I (and the other investors) have believed with our wallets for five years that this is a category killer, and that candy.com is undervalued.

Look at fund.com selling for $10M. The value of generics is only going to increase…can’t help but do so!

For those who are curious, I came into chocolate.com at the right time. One of the pprincipals of Internet Real Estate Group helped me sell my prime domain name, timeshares.com. I was happy to invest in another property that they were acquiring. They own about a dozen killers…phone.com, software.com, podcast.com, patents.com, etc.

Yes, it was worth it, and I’m glad to have had the opportunity to buy in to another great name such as chocolate.com!

By: Rick Shvartz

Rick Shvartz — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:04:19 +0000

MORONS

By: Improved SEO

Improved SEO — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 06:00:57 +0000

It doesn’t surprise me that Hershey didn’t jump at the chance to buy Candy.com. However, I’m a little surprised that Mars didn’t snatch it up, considering they bought Wrigley to expand their product base.

By: Derek Jones

Derek Jones — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:20:14 +0000

I’m not surprised Hershey’s pulled back on it’s online sales efforts. On the one hand they are going head to head with their own customers and seeing as it’s in the middle of July the last thing I’d want to be doing is shipping chocolate via UPS all over the country.

Chocolate.com might have been a better name for them to own but Candy.com not so much. The new owners of Candy.com has the right idea in representing all sorts of manufacturers. But I do agree if you are going to spend $3 million on the name you had better spend a good amount on the site and distribution systems to match it.

By: Robert Haastrup-Timmi

Robert Haastrup-Timmi — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 14:22:09 +0000

Ooops! it’s not Candy! do you mean Chocolate?…ha ha!

Chocolate.com looks like a flourishing and successful website. I don’t know who is behind it, big shame to Hershey! All that money and no common sense!