Why I Avoid Athlete Team and Event Domains Now

Some domains look like trophies. A lot of them are liabilities with a renewal date.

I am talking about athlete names, team names, famous events, celebrity “club” domains, and plenty of FirstLast.com names that happen to match someone famous — or someone who might become famous. I used to collect that stuff. I am done with it.

This is not legal advice. It is what I learned owning those names, getting cease and desist letters about fifteen years ago, and scrubbing the risky ones out of my portfolio now.

The Celebrity Club lesson

Back when I was building Celebrity Club Network ideas, I registered names like MileyCyrusClub.com and similar celebrity club domains. It felt clever. Fan community. Content hub. Traffic magnet. The internet was full of people doing versions of that play.

Then the letters showed up.

Cease and desist letters from Miley Cyrus, Barry Manilow, and a few other celebs. Not a fun inbox. Not a negotiation I wanted to romanticize. Whatever I thought I was building, the message from the other side was simple: that name is not yours to play with.

I do not know how common those campaigns still are day to day. I know they still exist, and I know I do not need to relearn the lesson with a new generation of athletes, influencers, and brands. Once you have sat across from that kind of letter, “but the domain was available” stops sounding like a strategy.

JamarrChase.com for $2k

Fast forward. I sold JamarrChase.com for $2,000.

On paper that can sound like a bargain for an NFL star’s name. Maybe someone else thinks I left money on the table. Fine. I think about the other direction more than the upside.

Could it have sold for more someday? Sure. Could it have become a headache, a dispute, a forced transfer, or a name I was stuck renewing while quietly hoping nobody cared? Also sure. Two thousand dollars with a clean exit beats a “what if” that keeps me watching legal risk instead of building brands I actually own.

That is the part domain forums underweight. The win is not always maximum sale price. Sometimes the win is getting off the board before the name owns you.

What I put in the risky bucket now

I am not anti-domain. I am anti-owning someone else’s identity as inventory. The risky bucket for me includes:

• Athlete names — first, last, or both, especially active pros and rising stars
• Team names and nicknames — pro, college, and anything that reads like official branding
• Event names — bowls, drafts, festivals, awards, big tournaments
• Celebrity and influencer personal names — including “club,” “fan,” and fan-site style add-ons
• FirstLast.com when it is clearly a known person — availability is not permission

Some of those names can look harmless in a portfolio spreadsheet. They do not look harmless when a rights holder, agency, or league decides they care.

Why “available” is a trap

Registrars will happily sell you a lot of things that are available. Available means the registry does not already have that string registered. It does not mean the trademark, publicity rights, or brand owner is fine with you parking it, flipping it, or building on it.

Domain investing rewards clarity. Risky personal and event names reward rationalization:

• “I am just holding it.”
• “I would sell it to them someday.”
• “It is a fan site / news site / tribute.”
• “Everybody does this.”

I have used versions of those lines in my head. They are how you talk yourself into renewals you do not need. The healthier filter is shorter: if the value depends on someone else’s fame, I do not want the name.

The quiet costs beyond lawyers

Even when nobody writes you a letter, these names tax the portfolio.

• Renewals on names you cannot openly develop
• Buyer conversations that get weird fast
• Marketplaces and landing pages that make the risk more visible
• Mental load every time a star blows up or a team rebrands
• Opportunity cost versus brandables you could actually sell cleanly

That last one connects to the bigger portfolio problem I wrote about in The Real Cost of Owning Too Many Domains. Risky names are not just legal risk. They are attention risk. They keep you managing edge cases instead of concentrating on names with a clean story.

What I keep instead

I still like domains. I like strong brandables, clear business names, and assets where the buyer story does not require explaining away a famous human or franchise.

The picking standards that matter more now are in How to Pick a Domain Name for a New Business: short, sayable, mostly .com, and owned by the brand using it — not rented from somebody else’s identity.

Same philosophy as consolidating brands. One clear name you can defend beats a pile of clever associations. That is the same posture as Should You Build One Brand or Multiple Niche Sites.

How I scrub the risky ones

Practical process when I audit:

• Flag anything that is a person, team, league, or event first. Do not debate it for weeks.
• Ask if the upside requires their fame. If yes, it is not my asset class anymore.
• Prefer a clean sale or drop over a clever hold. $2k and gone can beat “waiting for the right buyer.”
• Do not build fan properties on borrowed names unless you have a real relationship and real rights — I do not play that game casually.
• Put the money into names you can pitch without flinching. Portfolio quality over trophy names.

This is also life-audit energy. Cancel what creates risk and noise. Keep what matches how you actually want to operate. Domains belong in that cleanup with subscriptions and half-built projects — see Do a Life Audit Before You Go Location Independent.

Final thoughts

Athlete, team, and event domains can look like opportunity. For me they became a category I no longer want to underwrite. Celebrity Club taught me that early. JamarrChase.com for $2k reminded me that a “cheap” exit can still be the right exit.

I would rather own fewer names I can defend than a museum of other people’s fame. If you are sitting on a similar pile, run the honest filter: does this name create a business for me, or does it borrow someone else’s identity and hope nobody minds?

Hope is not a domain strategy. Clear brands are.