was praised for changing its business model this spring, but the decision has come back to haunt it.

In January of last year, when anything Internet-related was hot, the Sunrise, Fla., mortgage bank, then a traditional bricks-and-mortar company called First Mortgage Network, reinvented itself as a Web lender that would take applications from consumers in cyberspace. It bought an address that people shopping for mortgages on the Web would be likely to try:

But early this year "e-tailer" stocks suffered a huge investor backlash, and business-to-business became the new buzzword.

In March, after a year of huge losses, decided that the direct-to-consumer model was unprofitable and switched to a business-to-business strategy.

Some analysts said this was a smart move. But as part of the deal to buy the Web address, First Mortgage Network had signed a complicated marketing agreement with the domain name's previous owner, Inc. of Alameda, Calif.

The agreement assumed that would be a major direct-to-consumer lender; now the parties are suing each other, alleging contract violations. struck first, suing on May 18 for declaratory relief. responded with a suit on May 31, charging that had breached its contract by changing its core business model.

First Mortgage Network had realized early on the potential of the Internet and bought American Finance and Investment, an online lending pioneer, in 1998.

The next year it made an aggressive push into the Internet lending arena. According to's lawsuit, First Mortgage Network agreed to pay $2 million for the handle.

"It was a land rush for who could grab share the quickest, and there were tons of capital available through the IPO markets at that time," said Nick Karris, a senior analyst at Gomez Advisors. "Many companies, particularly the early companies like and E-Loan, were very aggressive to try to build a first-mover advantage." went public last August. Fueled by the euphoria over any company with a "dot-com" in its name, the stock soared, peaking at a closing high of $17.50 a share in September. But it has fallen steadily since then, and it was trading at $1.3125 at midday Wednesday.

Like many fledgling online companies, remains far from profitable. Since switching to a pure Internet model, it has lost more than $59 million - $47 million in 1999 alone. and now disagree on many details of their contract.

This much is certain: The deal gave First Mortgage Network rights to the Web address at an initial cash cost of $200,000. claims that the price also included 20,000 shares of's stock and up to $1.8 million in fees from all loans closed on the site.

A spokeswoman for said in a voice mail that, in addition to the $200,000, her company paid 140,000 shares at $4.61 a share, or $845,400. She did not mention any fees.

The domain-name sale was linked to a 10-year marketing agreement that requires to pay $80 for each application the latter feeds to the online lender, up to $2.5 million a year, according to the suit. If exercised to its limits, could get almost $27 million for the domain name, which would be one of the most lucrative sales of a Web address ever.

But this March changed its course. "It's too expensive to brand and to acquire a customer directly," Ed Johnson, then chief financial officer, said at the time. "It makes sense to acquire loan volume through other businesses, like point of sale, and it's a lot more cost-effective."

Analysts applauded the move, arguing that a business-to-business strategy offers more revenue opportunities than trying to lend to fickle borrowers, who browse and research on the Internet but so far do not typically close loans online or display any loyalty to Internet brands. "B-to-B could save a lot of these companies," said Mr. Karris.

"The initial models of spending at a loss to gain share, and using that to grow the business, hasn't generated profits," said Mr. Karris "The bottom line is that no one really knows how to efficiently attract and retain a consumer."

But what might be a smart business move for puts the fee windfall that was expecting in jeopardy.'s May 31 suit contends that is breaching the contract by changing its strategy and forming partnerships with other consumer businesses, such as realtors and home builders.

In its suit, charges that "failed to perform certain functions under the agreement," such as marketing and promotion, and that is seeking "inappropriate compensation and has been paid inappropriate compensation," for the application fees.

A Rose is A Rose...
Depending whom one asks, the domain name cost:
Number of shares 20,000 140,000
Total share payment $92,000 $645,400
Delayed payment $1.8 million None
Total $2.1 million * $845,000 *
* Initial cash payment was $200,000

Related link:

Subscribe Now

Access to authoritative analysis and perspective and our data-driven report series.

14-Day Free Trial

No credit card required. Complete access to articles, breaking news and industry data.