.COM will lose ground to xxxx.travel xxxx.news xxxx.ibm xxxx.mcdonalds?

[mathewka010]

Hi All NP'ers,

Having researched a little on the progression and development of ICANN's new proposal for TOP LEVEL DOMAINS- xxxx.weather xxxx.ibm xxxx.jobs xxxx.australia are we now going to see a new leader in the race for technology success!

Im currently in two minds and would love to hear everyones thoughts!

Thanks Mat

 

[verbster]

The term will probably be outdated in a few years.
Good TLDs should not be time-sensitive.

When you look at the fiasco of post-2000 extensions like .coop .aero .museum the prospects look bleak. Most people are only familiar with a handful TLDs and their own ccTLD. There are 240+ TLDs active, add another 200 if you will, most people would still be unaware.

Nah, the term "blog" is here to stay, at least for the forseeable future; even network neophytes now recognize what a blog is. And that's half the battle.

 

[akcampbell]

The term will probably be outdated in a few years.
Good TLDs should not be time-sensitive. When you look at the fiasco of post-2000 extensions like .coop .aero .museum the prospects look bleak. Most people are only familiar with a handful TLDs and their own ccTLD. There are 240+ TLDs active, add another 200 if you will, most people would still be unaware.

I can't see the term blog becoming outdated, it's going to be around for as long as the Internet is around. I can see sites like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter becoming outdated and words like "Tweet" disappearing, but not blog. I think .blog could work very well as an extension.

In the UK, everybody used FriendsReunited.co.uk for a couple of years, it was bought by the UK TV Channel ITV in 2005 for £120m, it made £22m profit in 2007, since then people have switched to Facebook and Twitter and FriendsReunited is rumoured to be for sale for just £15m.

.free, .news, and .help could also work well. People are looking for free things, news and help online. My logic is whatever people are looking for could work well as an extension.

.coop, .aero, and .museum were never going to work. I would describe their lack of success as nature taking its course rather than a fiasco.

When I read comments like this, it makes be wonder why I even bother visiting this forum

.com has made monopoly profits for registrants in the last 10 years because of a lack of viable alternatives. That acts like a capital magnet for new registries, so you get a raft of new extensions like .info, .pro, .tv. .me trying different things; .info 99 cent reg fees, .pro restrictions on registration, and .tv premium pricing on top keywords. .com continues to make supernormal profit and the bigger they get the more money will be invested in new registries to try to break that stranglehold.

My guess is that the stranglehold will be loosened by registries offering free lifetime domain registrations, more inherently brandable extensions like .pro that more closely match what businesses trademark offline, and new extensions like .blog that do what they say on the tin.

 

[netfleet]

In the UK, everybody used FriendsReunited.co.uk for a couple of years, it was bought by the UK TV Channel ITV in 2005 for £120m, it made £22m profit in 2007, since then people have switched to Facebook and Twitter and FriendsReunited is rumoured to be for sale for just £15m.
QUOTE]

That's because they made a strategic error IMO - they charged people 5 quid to be able to communicate. If they'd have allowed it at no cost, I reckon it would have been where FB is today.

A billion stupid little extensions only increases the value of quality .com domains.

No it doesn't - how can it. What is the absolute worst scenario for these new gTLDs? The answer is not a single person registers or buys one. In that case where would we be - exactly where we are today. No change to .com values.

The truth is some people will register them which will put money into domains with extensions other than the current options. This will incrementally hurt all existing domain values including com.

So all in all we have 2-3 people who have made money from the extension?

In defence of .pro though - that's probably 2 or 3 out of a dozen or so who tried to make a dollar out of it. Compare that to the 500 or so (guess) out of 10,000 or so (another guess) who have actually made money in com's starting since 2007. Made up the numbers but you can see th point - odds are better with .pro

.com will not lose ground to anything as long as we are using domains as we know them today. Adding the ability of anyone with lots of money to start a domain will dilute everything but .com though, probably effecting info and biz more than the ccTLD's.

There is talk that there could be thousands of new TLD's, but I really don't see that happening. Companies aren't going to get their own TLD as many suggest (.mcdonalds) as it is just too expensive and pointless unless they can sell tens of thousands of second level domain on the TLD to make it worthwhile. Most who could afford it already have the .com and are happy with that. Maybe a few social sites like facebook .fbk or twitter .twit :D might benefit by selling users a short custom URL, but I think that will be limited, and you could forward any other domain to a longer URL already.

I think there could be a few moderately successful generic ones like maybe .blog, .video, or similar names that can help target content or formatting similar to what .mobi does. Even those don't really give much advantage over what's already available. The ones who now strictly enforced content sTLD's have not been very successful in terms of actual use or recognition as they limit their sales (think .jobs, .travel, .aero, .coop). The ones who don't enforce at all (think .biz, .info, .net) don't give users that content search advantage and become just another TLD.

If this does happen (I hope Icann comes to their senses), I predict we won't see thousands of new TLD's, but maybe a couple dozen. Most won't attract end users for primary use, but will be parked for income or parked on .com's as keyword URL's, limiting their resale value to two or three figures except the most prime keywords.

Any large number of new TLD's would also have trouble getting registrars to pick all of them up, so they wouldn't be very universal in being able to transfer or consolidate to your favorite registrar.

That's a great post! Rep added. Agree with all except for your first statement - com values will be diluted IMO (but not by much)

 

[justdoitrocky]

No I believe .COM will increase in value.

 

[Archangel]

I still know ppl who've never heard of .info. Do I need to say anything further?

 

[akcampbell]

I still know ppl who've never heard of .info. Do I need to say anything further?

3-4 years ago somebody wouldn't have posted this comment because it would have been blindingly obvious. That .info gets singled out now as best in class and posted about for anti-alternative extension shock value is testament to the progress the extension has made.

I was walking down Oxford Street in London the other day and there were two buses waiting at the lights. Both had a full side advertisement for Vienna.info. Vienna.info is 3 off the top of the second page of Google for the keyword Vienna.

My local University bus company, Unobus, has Unobus.info on the side of their fleet of 50 buses. They rank number 1 for Unobus on Google. It says on their website that they drive 1.9m miles per year. That's alot of passers by picking up on .info.

The point to remember about alternative extension domaining is it's like investing in a small company. If the value of a small company goes from $10m to $20m, you make the same % profit as if you invest in a Fortune 500 company that goes from being worth $10bn to $20bn. Everything is relative.

 

[Archangel]

I still know ppl who've never heard of .info. I personally like them but a person's best bet is going with a known ext like.com or .net.[

3-4 years ago somebody wouldn't have posted this comment because it would have been blindingly obvious. That .info gets singled out now as best in class and posted about for anti-alternative extension shock value is testament to the progress the extension has made.

I was walking down Oxford Street in London the other day and there were two buses waiting at the lights. Both had a full side advertisement for Vienna.info. Vienna.info is 3 off the top of the second page of Google for the keyword Vienna.

My local University bus company, Unobus, has Unobus.info on the side of their fleet of 50 buses. They rank number 1 for Unobus on Google. It says on their website that they drive 1.9m miles per year. That's alot of passers by picking up on .info.

The point to remember about alternative extension domaining is it's like investing in a small company. If the value of a small company goes from $10m to $20m, you make the same % profit as if you invest in a Fortune 500 company that goes from being worth $10bn to $20bn. Everything is relative.

 

[MicroGuy]

I still know ppl who've never heard of .info. I personally like them but a person's best bet is going with a known ext like.com or .net.

Exactly. You are correct sir! Rep+

 

[labrocca]

Any newbies starting out in domaining are bound to fail if they invest in .com - it's too late to ride that wave IMO.

I don't believe that.

Today: all the new extensions - It is totally different this time, unlimited new tlds, the world could easily change, get your credit cards ready!

What ICANN is proposing isn't a "new set of names". They're proposing a total paradigm shift where relevant keyword structure is made into its own TLD platform. This just isn't comparable to what they did in the past with idiotic "new TLDs" which themselves were simply a profit driven retooling of existing, established concepts.

This is totally different, totally new.

You just proved Snoops point imho.

It's been a phenomenal undertaking by millions of people to just get .com where it is at now. Why would any other extension gain critical mass when .com can barely do it on its own? Development is so freakin' tedious and hard, why spend that effort on another extension? There will never be enough folks to do it.

This is where domainers miss the point and ICANN has it right for releasing new TLD's. I don't believe new extensions will hurt .com at all in valuation but let's face it...those that are small players and want development now have alternatives. Not everyone has a $xx,xxx budget. Some run mini-sites or blogs that don't need the dotcom but do want the keywords in their domain. It's sad when you have a great development idea then you whois and it's owned by nameadmin or buydomains. My most successful site is a .net. There are tons of alternative extensions with success. Domainers have a tough time understanding certain aspects of end-user mentality.

To be honest I don't know alot of people in the industry today who are making money because they "hand reg .coms in the mid to late 1990s", it is the very small minority-maybe a dozen or so people.

I agree. Most of my best sales were from resale domain or drops. I bought some great stuff 3-4 years ago for $xx that I still sell for $x,xxx. I see stuff now that if I had a better financial situation would love to buy. The market is depressed. We all know the story. It's tough but to say you can't make money in com is ludicrous. Look at the weekly sales charts.

For investment purposes, the only extension I like is .web. For one, it sounds "crisp and clear." It passes the radio test. We live in "Web" 2.0 not "Net" 2.0. If someone mentions Cars.Web, even non tech savvy people know such a string of words relates to an online destination. I can't say the same for Cars.Auto. Also, such an extension matches all keywords. The same can't be said for a name like insurance.pet. Anybody who invests in a extension like .pet or .food is only wasting money on a lonely island that will never gain universal traction

I agree. Maybe because I develop but I plan to invest heavily into web hoping to develop as much as I can. I can see trying to get 100 domains from sunrise.

3-4 years ago somebody wouldn't have posted this comment because it would have been blindingly obvious. That .info gets singled out now as best in class and posted about for anti-alternative extension shock value is testament to the progress the extension has made.

I think from a domain investor perspective info is tough but realistically I see a lot of development in the info world and that's because of it's low cost of entry. The same is going to happen as each extension is released. However value is value...and I have stated often that dotcom is like Manhattan real estate. It's the premium extension. It's not for everyone. However major players and those wanting a head start in biz (lol) will want com.

COM = Manhattan/NYC
NET = Los Angeles
ORG = Chicago
INFO = Dallas
BIZ = Miami
MOBI = Seattle

New extensions will just be smaller towns but CNO will only grow stronger.

 

[mjbenterprises]

I agree with most of what was said in the previous post, except I would use the following cities as analogies for the different TLDs..



COM = Manhattan/NYC
NET = Camden, NJ
ORG = Detroit
INFO = Gary, IN
BIZ = Calcutta, India
MOBI = Haiti

New extensions will just be smaller towns but CNO will only grow stronger.[/QUOTE]

 

[MicroGuy]

I also agree with most of what was said in the previous post, except I would use the following cities as analogies for the different TLDs..

COM = Manhattan, NYC
NET = Los Angeles, CA
ORG = Seattle, WA
INFO = Keene, NH
BIZ = Calcutta, India
MOBI = Pahrump, NV
TV = Bum*uck, Egypt

 

[Jaco]

I agree with most of what was said in the previous post, except I would use the following cities as analogies for the different TLDs..



COM = Manhattan/NYC
NET = Camden, NJ
ORG = Detroit
INFO = Gary, IN
BIZ = Calcutta, India
MOBI = Haiti

New extensions will just be smaller towns but CNO will only grow stronger.

I disagree with the general sentiment re: net and org, but this post had me crying laughing
IMO, anything south of .org and you're in Somalia, save for a few widely, locally accepted cctlds like de, etc.

 

[Archangel]

I also agree with most of what was said in the previous post, except I would use the following cities as analogies for the different TLDs..

COM = Manhattan, NYC
NET = Los Angeles, CA
ORG = Seattle, WA
INFO = Keene, NH
BIZ = Calcutta, India
MOBI = Pahrump, NV
TV = Bum*uck, Egypt

And going lower:

.tv = BFE
.cc = That fictional city John Hughes based all his films in
.ws = Hell

And on and on and on...

 

[bmugford]

I think that comparison list is pretty solid. However, I have to say my grandma lived in Keene, NH and it is far better than .INFO :lol:

Brad

I also agree with most of what was said in the previous post, except I would use the following cities as analogies for the different TLDs..

COM = Manhattan, NYC
NET = Los Angeles, CA
ORG = Seattle, WA
INFO = Keene, NH
BIZ = Calcutta, India
MOBI = Pahrump, NV
TV = Bum*uck, Egypt

 

[namehello]

com is king!

 

[jmcc]

I think that the way things are moving .com TLD is the global king and the ccTLDs are the local rulers/chieftans. The gTLDs are not a major threat to the .com dominance and broken down on a country by country basis, it quickly becomes apparent that most of the world is ccTLD/com. Then there is .net and .org followed by .info, .biz and .mobi. The rest of the gTLDs such as .pro don't have any significant market share. The .asia sTLDs was at 210985 yesterday morning. The .eu ccTLD was down to 2938919 and seems to be stalled at just under 3M domains. The .mobi TLD at 844687 domains is beginning to grow again but it is still very much a specialist/niche extension. The general reaction to .eu in the EU is that it is a junk extension. That's if the average EU head has even heard of .eu ccTLD. As for these new gTLDs that ICANN is trying to foist on the market, they are only there to make ICANN and their backers money. Some may be fulfilling a market need but most will be dead five years after launch.

In terms of registration volume, the biggest threat that .com TLD faces now is from the ccTLDs. Without the massive domain tasting of recent years, the growth of .com TLD has fallen back approximately to 2003/2004 levels. And back then, ccTLD growth was not as high.

Regards...jmcc

 

[DomainTalker]

IMO, anything south of .org and you're in Somalia...

Hahaha....Nice...


Well, look.....I don't think these new extensions will have any material effect on .com values.....Too many millions/billions of brand value have already been invested in .com brands by corporates, and small/medium size businesses, worldwide, for them not to defend their .com branding...


In the end, what's a domain extension? Its the 'suburb' (or maybe the 'town/city'). What's a domain keyword(s)? Its the 'street'.

New suburbs, and new streets in those new suburbs (and towns/cities), are being built all the time....It doesn't lower the value of the earlier key cities, towns, or suburbs, does it? In fact, arguably, it increases the value of the earlier towns.....New York real estate did not decrease in value because they later built Dallas, or Peonia...

People populate alternative locations for all kinds of reasons - And, people continue to invest in original, or earlier, locations because it suits - again, for all kinds of reasons.


New extensions? There'll be room for all - with variable degrees of success, for different people - with minimal, or no, impact on the earlier quality end of 'town'.

.

 

[netfleet]

com is king!

I wish people would stop quoting this inane line. It's driving me absolutely crazy!

Everybody, bar none, knows that com domains command the highest prices. Everybody. So why keep stating it?!

If this was a forum on commodity trading do you think people would keep piping up that platinum is the most expensive metal? No, because it just isn't relevant.

What we are concerned about is how to make a buck out of domains and that generally comes with change...

Rant over...

 

[Archangel]

com is king!

As the above poster said, there is no point in restating the obvious for the 200 millionth time. What a cliche

 

[akcampbell]

The rest of the gTLDs such as .pro don't have any significant market share.

That's true but it doesn't mean you shouldn't invest in it. If I invest in a company, I'm looking for one that will grow it's market share relatively faster than other companies. A company like Google has probably peaked in terms of market share and that's how I regard .com. .com will never be in a better position than it is now so is it the right horse to back? Human nature is such that most people like to back the winner even if the winner is overpriced. That leads to bubbles and price crashes. On the stockmarket, it's called the overreaction hypothesis.

I'm a contrarian investor, if I think there is a catalyst for change, I will back the loser. Pyschologically, it's a trickier path to follow because if you do something different to an overwhelming majority, you get ridiculed. However, the numbers speak for themselves. When I started investing in .pro in August 2007, there were 6,500 domains registered, by March 2009 that had risen to 35,000. Reg fees were $99 when I started regging, Encirca are currently running a $12.99 summer promotion for new .pro registrations. That's an 87% fall in reg fees. Last September, .pro restrictions were widened to include all professions in all countries, when I started regging it was law, medicine, accountancy, and engineering in Canada, US, UK and France.

I develop domains so obviously I prefer .com 100 times over. But if I can't get the keyword I want at a good price, I will buy it in another extension. I'm developing a .org at the moment, I tried to get the .co.uk and .com but it was clear the owners wanted a price way out of proportion to search volume and likely commercial return.

The market share of .pro is small, but there is room for relative outperformance if more of the restrictions get removed, more registrars offer them for sale and currently only 10% of registrars by volume do, and if reg fees continue to come down in line with other gTLD's.

If you strip out the gTLD's that are clearly not intended for commercial use, .pro is the 6th oldest behind .com, .net, .org, .info. and .biz. Out of that list, .biz is ugly, .info isn't particularly brandable (I was one of first people to pay $XX,XXX for .infos so that isn't intended as a criticism), and .org is arguably intended for non-commercial use. For such a lightly regged extension, .pro keeps good company and it will have an ageing head start on all the new gTLD's ICANN is planning.

 

[Jaco]

The market share of .pro is small, but there is room for relative outperformance if more of the restrictions get removed, more registrars offer them for sale and currently only 10% of registrars by volume do, and if reg fees continue to come down in line with other gTLD's.

The only thing .pro had going for it were the restrictions. When they allowed any Tom, Dick or Harry to register them, it became another 'concept TLD' amidst a wasteland of many others.

I hope you're right and you go on to make a fortune in this TLD, but I don't know if advocating less restrictions for it is a good idea. If Bob Smith the Janitor can register Doctor.pro, the entire intent of the extension is lost and without that intent working in its favor, the very existence of .pro makes little sense when it's reduced to "just another concept TLD" that unqualified "domainers" mine for keywords.

 

[akcampbell]

For me, the attraction was brandability and keyword availability and acquirability rather than restrictions. As a trademarking suffix, Pro has more references in the US trademark register than most alternative extensions added together. In terms of keyword availability and acquirability, I hand regged Gadget.pro, caught Play.pro on the drop by getting up at 5:00AM 4 mornings in a row, and paid $300 each for France.pro, Spain.pro and Italy.pro. I couldn't that in any other gTLD.

I know some people see .pro in terms of Doctor.pro first and foremost but wasn't my initial reaction. I appreciate the value of the medical and professional angle, I own Medicine.pro, Surgeon.pro, Surgery.pro, and Hospital.pro, but what I value most is the "pro" branding angle. For example, I bought Skate.pro and Surf.pro from Page Howe. My favourite .pros combine the pro branding angle with professional context, for example Studio.pro, Office.pro and Salon.pro. To get that degree of fit in other alternative extensions can be prohibitively expensive.

I think the odds are heavily weighed against me making any money out of .pro from resale or development but I have some good domains nevertheless. The extension - location couplings made me laugh. The matches could be bang on the buzzer but for all we know, .com, .net and .org could all be on the East Coast, .pro or more appropriately .tv could be LA. When Brits controlled 1/3 of the world and people said the sun never set on our Empire, .com would have been London.

 

[Kate]

I don't know if advocating less restrictions for it is a good idea. If Bob Smith the Janitor can register Doctor.pro, the entire intent of the extension is lost and without that intent working in its favor, the very existence of .pro makes little sense when it's reduced to "just another concept TLD" that unqualified "domainers" mine for keywords.

I think you are right but lifting the restrictions must have been a question of survival for .pro. I doubt that the future is bright though, because it's somewhat competing against .com - like .biz, that ironically has been more successful than .pro.

 

[akcampbell]

I'm don't think .pro competes against .com. If I can buy France.pro for $300 and people would consider France.com cheap at $3m, the two extensions are not really competing against eachother. It's like comparing a model plane to a fighter jet. .com competes against stronger ccTLDs locally, .net and .org compete against eachother, .biz and .info compete against eachother, new gTLD's will compete against eachother, but .pro orbits in its own little universe.

The part lifting of restrictions hasn't done much to aid .pros survival, RegistryPro collected in as much money with $99 reg fees and 6,500 .pros as it does with $20 reg fees and 35,000 .pros. Low reg fees drive take up but if you are only selling through 10% of registrars by volume and restricting registration to qualified professionals, no extension is going to get far.

RegistryPro has to renew it's management contract with ICANN in May 2010, they must have lost alot of money in the last 5 years so I can't see them wanting to continue running .pro unless ICANN remove the onerous restrictions. With new gTLDs on the way, all presumably unrestricted, that puts pressure on ICANN to level the playing field for .pro. If .eu, a muppet of an extension if ever there was one, can get to nearly 3m registrations, there has to be hope for .pro and any other new gTLD like .blog, .news, .help, .sport, .web, or .free that comes along.

 

[ZOX]

I think you are right but lifting the restrictions must have been a question of survival for .pro. I doubt that the future is bright though, because it's somewhat competing against .com - like .biz, that ironically has been more successful than .pro.

I agree.
...
Overall, .COM will remain THE Internet extention for the foreseeable future no matter what! :imho: