Jaco

The position you're taking is akin to saying that the result of a 6 year old child doodling with a crayon may have an impact on the eventual selling price of a Piccasso.

So, no, it isn't "very reasonable" to say that e-business123.tel may have an eventual impact on the selling price of business.com, per the butterfly effect. It's logically remote and entirely academic with absolutely no basis in 'non-theoretical' reality.

Adding more and more domains doesn't introduce a dilutive component to the macro domaining picture. Attritive? Sure, in the early years when there were still decent alternatives out there for registry fee. Still, cohearance and cogency in keywords is a finite thing and we strip-mined that mountain long ago. What's 'left' in the existing registry namespace is complete dross, the presence of which has absolutely no impact- whatsoever- on the market dynamics of totally unrelated names that are of genuine quality. To say that the total 'number' of domains has a dilutive impact on domain selling prices at-large is absurd, considering the number of domains that represent something meaningful (thus salable thus valuable) is virtually fixed, most all of them are spoken for (99.99>>%) while the number of registered .com domains is orders of magnitude above that figure.

equity78

Dilution would affect something that is the same. There is only one SEX.com, no matter how many idiotic names are regged in the .nf extension has no bearing on that.

There are 17,576 LLL.com because someone regs an LLL.cx does not dilute the value of the LLL.com. That might be a happy story that an alternative extension investor tells themself to get through the day, but its not true.

Unique quality does not get diluted, what can diluted is also ran extensions, sure if someone says .food .foods .restaurant who cares ? then there is dilution. .biz and .info and an extension I like .tv gets diluted by more vanity extensions. .com,.de,.cn,.co.uk,.ru etc... do not get diluted. Again IMO

__________________
Host your website with name.com and get up to $10.99 off any domain registration
First Quarter 2012 5 letter.com sales report

-NC-

They've been saying that for years. And it would eventually happen if not for IPv6. But as of right now, you can buy an IP address for $2 a month. So I don't think they're that scarce.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/domain-name-discussion/620697-web-could-run-out-addresses-next.html

It won't.

No.

When you set its nameservers to a DNS server that has an A record for the domain.

It's necessary for the parking/hosting company to have at least one IP address. Not the domain owner. As already stated, you can point any number of domains to one IP address.

__________________
NameCooler.com

DubDubDubDot

I would totally agree with you if buyers limited themselves to a certain level of quality. But we don't have planet Premium, planet Marginal and planet Trash. When the biggest sites in the world are on domains of all levels of quality, that sends a message that domains priced much lower than your budget are an option.

A classic example is three guys starting a video site and using a piece of trash hand reg like YouTube.com. Before the site became popular they received investment money and in theory could have bought something much better, but they didn't. Thus, trash prevented a premium sale.

JoshuaPz

This thread should be closed. Anyone with a basic understanding of computer networks knows why IPv4 address exhaustion will have zero impact on the number of domain names registered. Period

The IPv4 exhaustion just means that DNS service operators will need to purge or purchase a few those those vast blocks of "reserved", unused, and unneeded IP addresses previously assigned to software pioneers like IBM (back in these '80s when there were no IP address quotas). There are 4 billion IP address slots in all and only a couple hundred million domains registered, with many domains redirecting to the same IP address -- so Internet domains constitute only a small percentage of the 4B sum total. ~20M-40M new domains are registered per year now, and ICANN could cause 20M-40M IP slots to become freed in a matter of...hours, by petitioning those IBM types -- end of story. The IP shortage is more worrisome in the eyes of ISPs serving up IP addresses to consumers, who simply wish to the connect the internet, via DHCP and more and more folks throughout ex third-world countries purchase Internet connections. For every domain registered, at least 10 people sign up for a new Internet connection.
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=620697

IPv6 is a long while off from being implemented in practice. Sure, the infrastructure for it exists in Windows Vista and Windows 7, but 99%+ of all actual web servers out there only have IPv4 addresses (no IPv6) and there's no way that 99% figure will fall even to 90% by the expected point of IPv4 address saturation, around June 2011. IPv6 is a sluggish long-term solution -- maybe 10 years from now 40-50% of web servers will be IPv6 compatible. Until then, the only practical solution to the address saturation problem is an IPv4 address marketplace, which will unfortunately result in elevated operating costs for ISPs that will ultimately be passed on to consumers in the form of more expensive Internet service costs. That $40/month 3Mbps connection you have enjoyed until now will soon be costing you closer to $100/month and used in large part to line the pockets of IBM's executives. That's what happens when brilliant software engineers occasionally lack foresight.

__________________
NameFlipper: Make $250/hour catching & reselling domains to end-users! (Soon-to-drop domains with sales leads, free end-user e-mail sales templates, and free pricing guide)
DandyDomains.com: Discount exact-match domains, pre-screened to ensure quality, end-user need, and zero trademark conflicts.

ComKid

WordWalker

It's all right HERE.

Albert

We don't care.

mis_chiff

This is an old article Tuesday, August 5, 2008

and there is a thread around somewhere about it.

Wonder if that's an intentional typo in the Tagline?

WordWalker

(simply a wee bit of levity....)
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=620697

Mis_Chiff, can you scrap this thread? Apparently, we are not amused! -WW

mis_chiff

Found the other thread http://www.namepros.com/domain-name-...sses-next.html

WordWalker

Yes, that's what this parody piece was based on. Rep'd!

ZOOM in on the chart, and you'll see what I mean. Please feel free to "wish" this thread into the cornfield. That would be "real good"!
????: NamePros.com http://www.namepros.com/showthread.php?t=620697

Thanks,
-WW