In 2014 over a 1000 new domain extensions will be available.

JB Lions said:

Those dating sites are on .com. Plus, that's a different topic. Those alternate extensions already exist, as long as those dating sites. Haven't really caught on now, like those dating sites, have they? Go read those quotes again above, even those companies running those other extensions understand this.

Click to expand...

what happens when people realize the TLD in the address isnt a rational reason to trust a website?

mjnels said:

what happens when people realize the TLD in the address isnt a rational reason to trust a website?

Click to expand...

Nothing will change. And that's just one factor in a whole slew of them. That article touched on a few, some that were touched on in threads already. In a nutshell, just not a big enough end user market/real site development out there to really get one of these new extensions going. The numbers aren't there.

people will just continue being irrational? this happens sometimes but most things evolve.

and to answer the tag in the thread: im very lonely - come have a conversation with me.

mjnels said:

people will just continue being irrational? this happens sometimes but most things evolve.

and to answer the tag in the thread: im very lonely - come have a conversation with me.

Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with being irrational, you're focusing just on one point. Checked out Alexa top 500 sites in U.S.

.com/org - over 92%
.net - 16 = 3%
.gov - 6
.co.uk - 4
.eu - 2
.se 1
.co - 1 no_url_shorteners - url shortener
.ph - 1
.ch - 1
.do - 1
.ly - 1
.to - 1
.me - 1
.tv - 1
.cn - 1
.us - 1

In the U.S., .net is the closest, been around for awhile now, 3%. New extensions, bunch of under 1 percenters is what they'll be.

edited to add, what I find interesting about the .net numbers is, that was the #2 option, right after .com. Can't get .com, get .net. And after all these years, just 3%. If you look at top 500 internet merchants, I don't remember seeing even 1 .net, all .com. Every year, you have a certain amount of new merchants coming online, why isn't .net higher? Where is .biz? Why only 1 .us? Where is the market? If a true market existed, those numbers would be higher. After all those years of .net being available, you figure some of those .net merchants would have grown up and been on some of those lists, they're not. Those 16 .net above, most of those companies also have the .com, at&t, comcast, verizon, earthlink, etc.

Ah well, it'll be fun to watch it all play out.

right, i just think that data is from the "one factor" of trusting .com and people going with whats familiar all these years. it all makes sense i just dont think it'll stay like that.

Why are some TLDs trusted more than others ?

.com is popular and trusted because it's the extension that is used by most players in business.
It becomes a business norm, like the suit and tie.
It's not rational, it's not for technical reasons either. Just some sort of standard and expectation. But habits are deeply ingrained.

In other countries ccTLDs are trusted too (at varying degrees though) because they suggest proximity, local reach.
For example, .ca conveys the message I'm Canadian like you and not some faceless, distant multinational .com corporation.
In the US, .com is the de facto ccTLD in lieu of .us. Americans have come to think that .com is their TLD and they share it with the rest of the world...


One has to remember that there is no particular demand from consumers for new extensions. It is a scheme that is promoted by icann and those who stand to benefit from them.
The current system is not broken, and nobody is waiting for a fix.

You don't have to agree with what I'm saying, but look at past experiences. They are pretty bleak. Logically, and if they drew any lessons from the past, icann should not even approve new extensions, or only one by one, on a case by case basis, and after an in-depth analyst of their merits and prospects.

There are vested interests in motion and icann is a puppet.
Follow the money always.

I think some TLD can still achieve moderate success but in niche markets. Examples: .me .tv.

I don't see one attaining critical mass to compete with today's top TLDs. Maybe in 30 years but it will always be time to adjust accordingly.

i dont see any particular "alt TLD" catching on.. at least at first. with a bajillian TLD's in existence sales will probably be random and harder to predict. it'll probably be about the phrase and not the TLD itself. like if the .here TLD existed - "shop.here"

so they're the new "domain hacks."

I now stay here for ICANN's further notification since ICANN 46th Meeting on new gTLDs. Registries of these new gTLDs have much more pressure than us, actually.

There's a difference between a business presence on the internet and a search presence. The former is what most small business owners achieve, yes ideally they would like to rank well but its more important to have a location so they can tell people about it and advertise their site regionally. These people often cannot afford the .com or the continual seo needed to take it to page 1.

The new extensions will be consumed by small businesses, some will be better at marketing and seo than others and their budget will reflect that.

This leaves the .com as the stand out domain to own for larger businesses or start up's with a bigger budget. The next extensions will only highlight this so I do not see them impacting .com prices, they will further emphasise their value.

Don't forget if you are reading this then you have a higher level of understanding re domain names (and maybe a bit of .com snobbery too ) but in reality a lot of businesses particularly small mom and pop businesses just don't have this whole .com thing on their radar. They choose names because they like the sound of them, they are not looking to take over the world.

Horses for courses.

mjnels said:

what happens when people realize the TLD in the address isnt a rational reason to trust a website?

Click to expand...

A very important point and it is often overlooked. The recent .uk effort by Nominet seemed to be aimed at shifting some of the TLD back towards the managed registry model as the more difficult it is to get a domain name registered, the more trustworthy it can appear. Some, of course, considered it a money making exercise but ccTLD registries don't really think like gTLD registries. Trust is a big issue, especially when it comes to e-commerce.

Both .INFO and .BIZ gTLDs have effectively squandered any "trust capital" that they had when launched. The .INFO gTLD was marketed heavily and the special offers and discounts forced it into a continuous boom and bust cycle. It is now down from its 7M+ registrations. The .BIZ gTLD had plans to become a business only gTLD but they seemed to abandon that when ccTLDs started grown and taking most of the local businesses. When people stop trusting, or at least trust a TLD a little less, the long term effect is not good.

Regards...jmcc

With more and more people using the search engine, I feel that all TLDs will become meaningless in the future.

Trust in new gTLDs will take a hit when the extensions start going bankrupt and domain owners - including those who have invested in promoting their websites - are abandoned. There is no ICANN commitment to protect purchasers of domains in case of registry failure. They will try to find a new registry but if the extension is a loser nobody will take it and the registered domains vanish.

A USA Today story on businesses that lose their site this way will throw a lot of ice on new gTLDs. So will a pile of lawsuits.

--------

The other factor is Google and Amazon who, it appears, will be buying up most of the best extensions. Amazon will reserve their's for in-company use, Google is expected to offer theirs' free with included advertising. Neither plan will have much effect on the .Com aftermarket. Businesses won't want someone elses' ads on their website.

And they will knock at your door to buy the .com

teper said:

Most of the online businesses are of ecommerce type. so if someone want to enter into ecommerce space and want to avoid hefty cost of aftermarket domains then they can now have option to start business on some new gtld like .shop and make the new website popular using viral marketing tactics like spreading coupons and using social networks and even those customers who are not aware of .shop tld will visit the site and bookmark it.
The introduction of new gtlds will provide more options to end users with limited funds.

Click to expand...

My prediction of what will happen: The domains under an oddball TLD worth anything now like .info, .biz, .co, .us, .mobi, .me, .tv etc etc will lose tons of value. (Hint: If you have any of these, I'd sell them asap.)

I think .com and .net will hold very strongly.

.TV Will stay strong because all the TV stations are now available on the internet. IT makes sense to used .TV instead of the actual "TV"

dotbay said:

.TV Will stay strong because all the TV stations are now available on the internet. IT makes sense to used .TV instead of the actual "TV"

Click to expand...

People will just use a centralized source for TV. It's much more convenient. The big cable companies already have apps, so .tv is worthless now.

Check out TWC TV or Cablevision. They already have .com websites people go to outside of apps.

Kind of funny reading the subject of this thread now. I think the people at ICANN that could have planned this better and actually resulted in over 1,000 coming out this year were the people that immediately left after the gTLD plan passed to go to other companies and profit from it instead.

This is such an old question, asked pretty much EVERY TIME a new ext is released. The answer never changes. The answer here is the same as it was last year and years before it. It won't change. .info didn't really change a thing. Same with .biz, .name, .mobi etc. I'm not sure of the logic that this new wave of extensions will change the perennial scope of gTLDs.

Archangel said:

This is such an old question, asked pretty much EVERY TIME a new ext is released. The answer never changes. The answer here is the same as it was last year and years before it. It won't change. .info didn't really change a thing. Same with .biz, .name, .mobi etc. I'm not sure of the logic that this new wave of extensions will change the perennial scope of gTLDs.

Click to expand...

the logic is, there are hundreds and hundreds and it will be harder to ignore.

stop thinking a particular TLD is or is not going to "catch on"

that isnt the point..who cares about that nonsense. there is no TLD thats going to "catch on" but acting like 1,000+ new TLD's being released in the same year are going to be ignored is hilarious.

its not the same as .mobi .biz .name because those were released spread YEARS apart and there was little hope that those TLD's alone would change the way website addresses look. thats what we're talking about here - changing the way website addresses LOOK - people talking about a particular TLD catching on or not catching on are missing the point entirely.

"that isnt the point..who cares about that nonsense. there is no TLD thats going to "catch on" but acting like 1,000+ new TLD's being released in the same year are going to be ignored is hilarious."

It's more hilarious that you think people notice domain extensions instead of websites. It's very simple, in order for any of them to catch on, there needs to be development where people will actually see them, on a live, quality site.

I disagree heavily on this. Your logic seems a tad flawed: With so many established .coms out there (and the fact that the vast majority of every non ccTLD-using website is a .com), do you seriously think that even 10,000 new extensions will do anything more than ripple the water a bit? The buers of these other 1k will be investors. ppl will not buy them to develop. Yes, info/biz etc. are prime examples. Do you think t'll make a difference with 1,000 opposed to only a few (info/biz/name)? It won't. Period. An extension will only hit the general conscience if it's seen a lot. And these won't be seen a lot because THEY WILL NOT BE DEVELOPED. Investors will buy them, hoping they'll take off. It won't happen. I've never visited a .pro site, ever, and I only know the ext exists because of my years in this business. And the vast majority of non-domaners do NOT EVEN KNOW OF .INFO. I respect your opinions, but I see holes in your logic. If these are not developed, the 1k will be pointless at best. And if there are so many to chose from, no single new ext will become developed enough to register in the internet community's mind.

The new extensions will have no value, no point, and in no way could ever possibly hurt .com or any established extension.

mjnels said:

the logic is, there are hundreds and hundreds and it will be harder to ignore.

stop thinking a particular TLD is or is not going to "catch on"

that isnt the point..who cares about that nonsense. there is no TLD thats going to "catch on" but acting like 1,000+ new TLD's being released in the same year are going to be ignored is hilarious.

its not the same as .mobi .biz .name because those were released spread YEARS apart and there was little hope that those TLD's alone would change the way website addresses look. thats what we're talking about here - changing the way website addresses LOOK - people talking about a particular TLD catching on or not catching on are missing the point entirely.

Click to expand...

mjnels said:

the logic is, there are hundreds and hundreds and it will be harder to ignore.

stop thinking a particular TLD is or is not going to "catch on"

that isnt the point..who cares about that nonsense. there is no TLD thats going to "catch on" but acting like 1,000+ new TLD's being released in the same year are going to be ignored is hilarious.

its not the same as .mobi .biz .name because those were released spread YEARS apart and there was little hope that those TLD's alone would change the way website addresses look. thats what we're talking about here - changing the way website addresses LOOK - people talking about a particular TLD catching on or not catching on are missing the point entirely.

Click to expand...

I'd ask yourself a simple question. What's easier to handle...a thousand things coming at you at once or one thing at a time

Now we both agree that mobi, name, biz, are pretty much failures. You admit that they were spaced out far enough to get noticed by the masses but for whatever reason they remain irrelevant. And somehow thousands of new extensions will be noticed by the masses and take root? Really? :lol:

Bingo. :D

Keith said:

I'd ask yourself a simple question. What's easier to handle...a thousand things coming at you at once or one thing at a time

Now we both agree that mobi, name, biz, are pretty much failures. You admit that they were spaced out far enough to get noticed by the masses but for whatever reason they remain irrelevant. And somehow thousands of new extensions will be noticed by the masses and take root? Really? :lol:

Click to expand...

There are more than 200 TLDs in existence right now if you include the ccTLDs. People probably wouldn't qualify for most of those but they don't bother. They know that other TLDs exist, but not how many.
In the future it's very likely that some corporations/cities etc will start using their vanity TLD but that doesn't mean I want one. I'm afraid most will be niche TLDs. Always a few exceptions of course but in terms of market share I think they will struggle.
But if domainers are in a state of panic and drop some good stuff I am happy.
I am still making sales to end users so it seems that they haven't got the memo yet (that domaining is dead).

Keith said:

I'd ask yourself a simple question. What's easier to handle...a thousand things coming at you at once or one thing at a time

Now we both agree that mobi, name, biz, are pretty much failures. You admit that they were spaced out far enough to get noticed by the masses but for whatever reason they remain irrelevant. And somehow thousands of new extensions will be noticed by the masses and take root? Really? :lol:

Click to expand...

this is what im talking about.

why are you talking about "easier to handle" ???? handle for who?

non-domainers dont want to handle anything. they see website addresses and thats it. they dont have an interest in handling them or remembering which ones exist. why is it so hard to understand that with thousands of .weird TLD's it eventually wont be as weird anymore.

thats what im talking about. breaking through the weirdness barrier.

today, everything besides .COM (and respective country code) is seen as "oh you couldnt get the .com"

so, occasionally i see a .biz or .info address - rarely but still i see them. hey i even seen a .mobi address the other month on pair of hair clippers i bought at target - admittedly its only like the 4th or 5th one ive seen in the real world.

so all im talking about here is the normalization of .weird TLD's and that wasnt gonna happen with a couple odd TLD's....

forget about the idea of people "remembering which ones exist"... because its about as irrelevant as remembering all area codes that exist.

---------- Post added at 04:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:39 PM ----------

JB Lions said:

"that isnt the point..who cares about that nonsense. there is no TLD thats going to "catch on" but acting like 1,000+ new TLD's being released in the same year are going to be ignored is hilarious."

It's more hilarious that you think people notice domain extensions instead of websites. It's very simple, in order for any of them to catch on, there needs to be development where people will actually see them, on a live, quality site.

Click to expand...

you guys are the ones saying people notice specific extensions.

pointing out how .mobi .biz .name didnt catch on... its irrelevant.

the idea of a TLD catching on is history now. when you can separate words with a dot its not about that anymore.

yes 1,000 choices is better than 5.