opinion A few companies that believe in the future of new gTLD's...

[000]

We hear a lot around the forums from people who see no future in the new gTLD program. They'll never catch on! is the battle cry, as if people are either incapable or unwilling to use or remember anything besides the almighty .com.

But what do the big wigs have to say?

Well, here are just a sampling of the international powerhouses that are each getting their own gTLD/s -- if that answers the question !!

Disney (.abc)
NFL (.nfl)
NBA (.nba)
MLB (.mlb)
Marriott (.marriott)
Hyatt (.hyatt)
Intel (.intel)
Visa (.visa)
FedEx (.fedex)
Netflix (.netflix)
Nike (.nike)
Lego (.lego)
Mattel (.mattel)
Best Buy (.bestbuy)
Jaguar Land Rover (.jaguar .landrover)
Fiat Chrysler (.chrysler .ferrari .fiat .jeep)
Discover (.discover)
Toyota (.toyota .lexus)
Honda (.honda)
Kia (.kia)
Citigroup (.citi)
Hitachi (.hitachi)
Xerox (.xerox)
Staples (.staples)
Gallup (.gallup)
GoDaddy (.godaddy)
Honeywell (.honeywell)
American Family Insurance (.amfam)
State Farm (.statefarm)
Progressive (.progressive)
Esurance (.esurance)
SC Johnson (.scjohnson)
Symantec (.norton .symantec)
Tiffany & Co. (.tiffany)
JCPenney (.jcp)
T.J. Maxx (.tjmaxx .tjx)
Macys (.macys)
L'Oréal (.makeup .beauty)
Microsoft (.microsoft .office .skype .windows .xbox)
etc

Do those names mean anything to you?

It would seem that many here think that these companies will never even use or advertise their fancy new URL's... that the "general public" still won't be aware of alternative URL's (gasp!!) even 5 years from now.

Say whaaa?!

How could they NOT? In the next few years, we will all be bombarded with new gTLD's from all directions, including many of the ones listed above.

If .com is still The Future, and the future of the new gTLD program is so uncertain (or doomed from the start, as many would argue), why is it that so many of the largest companies in the world are jumping aboard, rather than waiting it out from the sidelines? It's a very expensive endeavor, and it's not like anyone else is going to scoop up .NFL or .NETFLIX. Clearly, they aren't buying the whole .com is all that matters! hogwash.

Of course, many .com die-hards have spent a decade (or two!) investing solely in .com, so it is not surprising that they are slow to realize/accept what's happening. But the truth is, the tipping point will soon be upon us.

No longer will the NFL much care about Dolphins.com. They'll use Dolphins.NFL anyway.
Making a movie? There is no need to have the .com. Simply get the MovieTitle.movie.
Do you specialize in auto repair? Find a cool .repair and call it a day!
You get the idea!

It's way past time to admit that .com's are already losing value en masse. If you're still a .com die-hard, it's not too late, but the optimal time to re-evaluate your strategy has long since passed. You'll need to adapt sooner than later, or you will almost certainly go down with the ship.


Don't go down with the ship !





See more delegated strings here:
https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings

 

[joro001]

And so the discussion goes on and on lol.

It amazes me this still isn't settled. I'm invested heavily in .com but acknowledge in the coming years the value of average to poor .coms will continue to go down as they have been doing for a while bit by bit.

I firmly believe that the really premium .coms, one word.coms and 2l.coms/ 3l.coms etc. will go up further and become ever harder for small players to acquire leaving them open to only companies with big marketing spends.

I also believe that new GTLD's are also going to be a disaster for domain investing as a whole in the lower to medium range of quality in the new extensions as well, as no one will want to pay up for an alternative extension which is exactly that - an alternative to .com.

The premium GTLD's have large upfront costs and high renewals that make them prohibitive to domainers unless they have huge pockets and have the leisure of waiting for 3-5 years in the hope of some big paydays.

Many registrars have said openly they want to cut out domainers from the new extensions and that is precisely what has happened with the best names held back by the registries and only the chaff left in 99% of cases. To bring the point home I just deleted my last GTLD's in .online with great keywords, but I was not going to pay renewals for them and hope one day i'll get a couple of grand ROI for them at best, simply not worth it.

Bottom line new GTLD's will become more and more adopted by end users over time, it is beyond debate, it is happening already and will continue to become more accepted with .com likely still the main extension of use.

However, i'm sorry to say it, there is no serious money for domainers in the scenario that is playing out and you will not be able to ask big prices for your average to okay .coms with these alternatives either. The premiums already will set you back serious money so you better have huge pockets to play in domains or else it's going to be one big fail short to medium term for all extensions.

Kind of reminds me of SEO, used to be anyone could rank high with a small budget. Now Google has prioritised all the big brands e.g. Amazon, ebay etc. in the search results and pushed out the small players destroying their online presence. Only companies with big budgets can compete now in SEO in all niches worthwhile targeting. A similar thing is happening with domains.

My opinion only.

 

[dordomai]

I think the main point is that nGTLD investors believe the following:

nGTLD will be extremely successful and they will make tons of money.

.com investors believe:

nGTLDs will largely fail and investors go broke.

What's to happen IMO.

nGTLD largely fail, investors broke (Most likely).

Alternative scenario(much less likely):

nGTLD successful, registry rich, domainers poor

Impossible scenario (won't happen):

nGTLD successful, registry rich but allows domainers to enrich themselves.

 

[joro001]

I think the main point is that nGTLD investors believe the following:

nGTLD will be extremely successful and they will make tons of money.

.com investors believe:

nGTLDs will largely fail and investors go broke.

What's to happen IMO.

nGTLD largely fail, investors broke (Most likely).

Alternative scenario(much less likely):

nGTLD successful, registry rich, domainers poor

Impossible scenario (won't happen):

nGTLD successful, registry rich but allows domainers to enrich themselves.

This sums it up better then my long winded post above much more succinctly. The only addition is I believe that .com investors are going to struggle unless they either have great names already or don't have big budgets to buy up quality names. I can see medium to average to lower quality .coms to see demand continue to fall over time.

 

[168]

Interesting Auction, @ west(.)xyz
250-3100 us "Alternatives" in the aftermarket
Margins on par with average .coms

Current search results: the highest price: 21000 Yuan   Lowest price: 1500 Yuan   Average price: 3712 Yuan   Total Records: 68 Tiao   Total amount: 252 418 Yuan

domain name price Transaction time Types of Bids
243.xyz ¥ 4800 2016-08-26 21:25:00 Auction 49
mbw.xyz ¥ 1900 2016-08-26 21:21:01 Auction 62
xhw.xyz ¥ 1700 2016-08-26 21:13:00 Auction 46
zr.cx ¥ 2100 2016-08-26 16:13:12 Auction 50
nyw.xyz ¥ 2200 2016-08-26 10:04:06 Auction 19
fhw.xyz ¥ 2100 2016-08-26 09:09:54 Auction 38
zmw.xyz ¥ 1900 2016-08-26 09:09:54 Auction 35
jww.xyz ¥ 1900 2016-08-26 09:09:54 Auction 44
fkw.xyz ¥ 2400 2016-08-26 08:42:23 Auction twenty two
zlw.xyz ¥ 1900 2016-08-26 08:41:51 Auction twenty four
ykw.xyz ¥ 1900 2016-08-26 08:41:50 Auction 30
yjw.xyz ¥ 1900 2016-08-26 08:41:50 Auction twenty one
pcw.xyz ¥ 2600 2016-08-25 23:02:22 Auction 43
pjw.xyz ¥ 2100 2016-08-25 23:02:22 Auction 54
cxqj.cn ¥ 1500 2016-08-25 23:00:16 Auction 55
scqf.com ¥ 8600 2016-08-25 22:31:37 Auction 40
forever.xyz ¥ 2200 2016-08-25 20:55:49 Auction 42
peter.wang ¥ 2000 2016-08-25 14:42:38 Price 1
mai.ltd ¥ 1500 2016-08-25 13:34:21 Price 1
wmall.vip¥ 1600 2016-08-25 13:28:25 Auction 91
cnr.xyz ¥ 1600 2016-08-24 23:06:04 Price 1
204.xyz ¥ 4000 2016-08-24 22:28:59 Auction 73
syqz.cn ¥ 1500 2016-08-24 21:18:23 Auction 40
mxw.xyz ¥ 2100 2016-08-24 19:17:53 Auction 39
lww.xyz ¥ 2500 2016-08-24 19:17:53 Auction 71
xdw.xyz ¥ 2400 2016-08-24 19:17:08 Auction 28
mkw.xyz ¥ 2300 2016-08-24 19:17:07 Auction 32
pzw.xyz ¥ 2100 2016-08-24 19:17:07 Auction 50
ppw.xyz ¥ 3000 2016-08-24 19:17:06 Auction 78
slw.xyz ¥ 2100 2016-08-24 19:17:06 Auction 42
mqw.xyz ¥ 2200 2016-08-24 19:17:05 Auction 60
79138.cc¥ 3000 2016-08-24 16:10:21 Price 1
6768.vip ¥ 4100 2016-08-24 09:27:45 Price 1
109.xyz ¥ 5400 2016-08-23 23:52:07 Auction 64
184.xyz ¥ 3700 2016-08-23 22:08:59 Auction 40
j.city ¥ 2100 2016-08-23 21:51:46 Auction 49
vik.xyz ¥ 2700 2016-08-23 21:50:59 Auction 81
tffs.cn ¥ 1500 2016-08-23 21:15:05 Auction 4
183.xyz ¥ 14500 2016-08-23 17:06:44 Auction 96
674.xyz ¥ 4100 2016-08-23 17:06:44 Auction 63
70.red ¥ 7777 2016-08-23 14:16:27 Price 1
ptqz.cn ¥ 1588 2016-08-23 10:51:14 Price 1
wfbn.cn ¥ 1555 2016-08-23 10:51:13 Price 1
pjy.tv ¥ 1800 2016-08-23 10:42:37 Price 1
326.ltd ¥ 1800 2016-08-23 06:30:14 Auction 44
327.ltd ¥ 1800 2016-08-23 06:30:14 Auction 35
182.xyz ¥ 16500 2016-08-22 22:38:59 Auction 40
325.ltd ¥ 1800 2016-08-22 22:04:29 Auction 46
7.city ¥ 2100 2016-08-22 21:55:37 Auction 54
chachong.wang ¥ 1998 2016-08-22 18:17:34 Price 1
page 2
38.red ¥ 5500 2016-08-22 16:01:55 Price 1
275.ltd ¥ 3200 2016-08-22 15:36:00 Auction 43
912.ltd ¥ 2800 2016-08-22 15:34:40 Price 1
276.ltd ¥ 3100 2016-08-22 15:31:55 Auction 42
weilu.org ¥ 2100 2016-08-22 11:46:20 Auction 1
umeclub.cn ¥ 1500 2016-08-22 10:13:10 Price 1
dqhx.cn ¥ 1600 2016-08-22 09:23:39 Auction 25
qka.xyz ¥ 3400 2016-08-22 01:08:09 Auction 67
186.xyz ¥ 20000 2016-08-21 22:11:00 Auction 101
692.ltd ¥ 2500 2016-08-21 20:22:34 Price 1
138.xyz ¥ 8000 2016-08-21 13:49:38 Price 1
295.ltd ¥ 3100 2016-08-21 05:51:12 Auction 40
029.xyz ¥ 9200 2016-08-21 00:17:41 Auction 111
181.xyz ¥ 21000 2016-08-20 22:51:00 Auction 116
426.xyz ¥ 5000 2016-08-20 21:42:59 Auction 54
rcze.com¥ 2000 2016-08-20 13:27:23 Price 1
mjqq.cn ¥ 1500 2016-08-20 12:03:12 Auction 17
777.run ¥ 2500 2016-08-20 07:25:13 Price 1

 

[jmcc]

There is evidence the opposite is true. USAGE of .COM has declined 1.9% just in the last year.

Source w3techs.com

Historical trends in the usage of top level domains for websites

This report shows the historical trends in the usage of top level domains since August 2015.

1 Aug 2015 1 Aug 2016
.COM- 50.8% 50.6% 50.5% 50.3% 50.1% 49.8% 49.7% 49.6% 49.5% 49.4% 49.3% 49.1% 49.0% 48.9%

Nah. Wouldn't trust those numbers at all.

Regards...jmcc

 

[168]

these are a handful of sites. I can show you more developed .infos and .biz and .me is a ccTLD

You will go broke being a pure play info and biz investor. Not even mentioning .me. You can not invest in these.

So far Amazon has not used a single extension. The Amazon story of today was a BS, 100% fiction story and predictably nGTLD investors fell for it.



they are not making huge miscalculations. 250k are nothing for these companies. They don't care if they lose them or not. It's nothing for them.

Your on. Show the forum a list of major players using .info and .biz
Maybe you can remind us how much .Web cost? Purchased by the granddaddy of the industry?
Do you have a source that backs up 250k and the purchases are mere speculation?
Amazon- The whole world will know in 2 weeks.
Cheers!

 

[168]

Nah. Wouldn't trust those numbers at all.

Regards...jmcc

Surely there's more to the comment please explain.
Thank you

 

[jmcc]

Surely there's more to the comment please explain.
Thank you

Measuring usage and development in a TLD is a complex process. Those figures do not look accurate for .COM TLD and do not reflect usage patterns in that TLD.

Regards...jmcc

 

[jmcc]

I don't see any definition. A webpage can be a parked page. Unless they state they exclude them I assume they are included.

And that's a very important part of the argument. It looks like these guys don't understand what they are trying to measure. As I said above, measuring usage and development in a TLD is a complex process. When the Chinese speculative domains hit .COM and .NET, it actually drove the usage figures down on the new registrations because most of them had no functioning website.

Regards...jmcc

 

[168]

Measuring usage and development in a TLD is a complex process. Those figures do not look accurate for .COM TLD and do not reflect usage patterns in that TLD.

Regards...jmcc

Could you please elaborate ? Those figures do not look accurate for .COM
Can you provide a better source?
Basis for the stats
We investigate technologies of websites, not of individual web pages. If we find a technology on any of the pages, it is considered to be used by the website.
We include only the top 10 million websites (top 1 million before June 2013) in the statistics in order to limit the impact of domain spammers. We use website popularity rankings provided by Alexa (an Amazon.com company) using a 3 months average ranking. Alexa rankings are sometimes considered inaccurate for measuring website traffic, but we find that they serve our purpose of providing a representative sample of established sites very well.
We do not consider subdomains to be separate websites. For instance, sub1.example.com and sub2.example.com are considered to belong to the same site as example.com. That means for example, that all the subdomains of blogger.com, wordpress.com and similar sites are counted only as one website.
We do not include redirected domains. For example, Sun.com redirects to Oracle.com, and is therefore not counted.
Because our definition of "website" differs a bit from Alexa's definition, the "top 10 million" websites are actually less than 10 million. However, this has no statistical significance.

 

[jmcc]

This is what the result of a real survey look like:
http://www.hosterstats.com/com-website-usage-survey.php

"We investigate technologies of websites, not of individual web pages. If we find a technology on any of the pages, it is considered to be used by the website."

This is particularly worrying because it suggests that there is no analysis of usage at all.

The development and usage in a TLD are actually more complex that it would seem because there are different types of usage. Some sites may not even be in the TLD but are sites from other TLDs where the webmaster has not set up a proper redirect. Wordpress and Joomla installations may be nothing more than a "Hello World" post and nothing more. Registrars and hosters may, if they are not parking undeveloped domains on PPC may have their own custom "coming soon" page. People may have the domain names for sale though they are not posted on Sedo, Afternic or any of the big auction sites. A site could be a brand protection registration where it is not actually a site in that TLD. The site could be compromised/hacked. Measuring all this is actually more complex than saying n% of sites in a TLD are being used. Preselecting sites based on Alexa is very dodgy methodology and the reference to "domain spammers" seems utterly clueless.

Regards...jmcc

 

[168]

And that's a very important part of the argument. It looks like these guys don't understand what they are trying to measure. As I said above, measuring usage and development in a TLD is a complex process. When the Chinese speculative domains hit .COM and .NET, it actually drove the usage figures down on the new registrations because most of them had no functioning website.

Regards...jmcc

Good case for just as much speculation in .com/.net leftovers . The climate in the early days of .com wasn't much different than it is now for New "G's" A significant portion in the possession of speculators for many years, high reg fees, few end users. Still to this day
lots and lots of .com/.net nobody wants or have ever been developed. The same will be true for New "G's"
The game is the same just a bit harder to pick the winners.

 

[168]

This is what the result of a real survey look like:


This is particularly worrying because it suggests that there is no analysis of usage at all.


The development and usage in a TLD are actually more complex that it would seem because there are different types of usage. Some sites may not even be in the TLD but are sites from other TLDs where the webmaster has not set up a proper redirect. Wordpress and Joomla installations may be nothing more than a "Hello World" post and nothing more. Registrars and hosters may, if they are not parking undeveloped domains on PPC may have their own custom "coming soon" page. People may have the domain names for sale though they are not posted on Sedo, Afternic or any of the big auction sites. A site could be a brand protection registration where it is not actually a site in that TLD. The site could be compromised/hacked. Measuring all this is actually more complex than saying n% of sites in a TLD are being used. Preselecting sites based on Alexa is very dodgy methodology and the reference to "domain spammers" seems utterly clueless.

Regards...jmcc

The number of responding websites was 94,937
Sorry, to compare 95k site survey to 10m site survey using different variables is absurd

Looks like an accurate # of truly active sites will be a great mystery for a long time. More speculation.

I do like the breakdown of the survey however the small number surveyed?
Based on the survey, only 30% actually use .com ? Best case ? Looks like a major bubble in .com/.net
nice stats on growth as well showing stagnate growth
over 5 years with the exception of the China infusion in 2015.
This is where .com/.net leftovers will remain, unused, just like most of the New "G's" nobody wants.
The New "G's"- G stands for New Growth in Domains users do want and carry just as much marketing value at a better price point
assuming exclusion of the "investment grade" that 90% would not purchase anyway.
Happy Hunting

 

[168]

Microsoft acquires BEAM.PRO

Will they keep the name? Will they buy BEAM.COM?

Will it re-direct to BEAM.MICROSOFT?

 

[jmcc]

The number of responding websites was 94,937
Sorry, to compare 95k site survey to 10m site survey using different variables is absurd

This is a usage survey. The other one is not.

It is possible to build a model of usage in a large TLD by randomly sampling enough domain names and applying the same parsers to the data as would be used on a full TLD. It is a 110,000 domain survey so it actually shows the % of domains without a website in the sample.

Regards...jmcc

 

[dordomai]

Show the forum a list of major players using .info and .biz

I don't think that I said I ever see major players using .info etc. for their main homepage. I said that I do often see .info sites in the wild and I spot even .biz sometimes.(It's rare though) I don't remember seeing nGTLDs so far strangely.

I do remember very clearly that McDonalds(the fast food chain) was using an .info for a specific ad some years back. Some usage will happen. I don't keep track of usage.

There are multi billion dollar companies that use these extensions. another example:

http://panasonic.biz/

Do you have a source that backs up 250k and the purchases are mere speculation?

common sense? Most applicants have not done anything with their extensions so far. If they had great plans we would already see that happening. It isn't. Therefore most weren't too serious about the 250k which is NOTHING for a big corporation

What else was it for them except a minor distraction?

In addition I don't think it was speculation at all. protective, not knowing what to do with their money, fear of falling behind etc. maybe.

Any other assumption than this would mean that they had huge plans but didn't end up doing anything. Which would be very strange. Oh, I forgot next month there will be a HUGE announcement that Amazon will split themselves up into amazon.cars, buy.amazon etc. etc. Of course it will always be next month.

They have been saying this for 2 years now. Nothing ever happened.

Maybe you can remind us how much .Web cost? Purchased by the granddaddy of the industry?

.net alone is worth $500 million. It is not as much for them as you might think.

I think there is little to discuss here. there is little promising happening in the gTLD field at the moment. I am not biased in any way when I say this. It's just the reality. If I felt otherwise I would be buying.

Honestly, I have been looking at this from many angles and the risk/reward ratio is not good.

I think investors are blinded by greed.

After the first year, while being skeptical I thought there could be the possibility that the nGTLDs would enjoy a certain degree of success within a few years, Mostly because of the hype, herd mentality and reg number trend.

Now after 2 years I can say it is worse than I had expected. Even I am surprised when seeing the current registration trends. It doesn't look good at all.

Yeah many newcomers sitting on their portfolios 1-2 years old and hoping for a big breakthrough. Any small sign is interpreted as the beginning of a new huge wave. It's just a belief. They wait and believe.

They think 1% share of Alexa Top 1 million is fanastic and this will grow into something big because the extensions are still fresh and everything is possible and big money is behind it. That is just wishful thinking.

When 100 startups choose a .com it is not even mentioned. When a single startup chooses a new TLD, it is the sign that the new GTLDs are taking over.

The interesting thing is we had similar forum discussions about a year ago. Anyone remember the Chinese bubble? Among some investors there was the same mentality seen here. They were virtually immune against the idea the prices could stop rising.

Chips floor price 5k in 2016. 6N without 4,0 floor $500. Anyone remember this?

Anyone remember the arguments?

-It does not matter if 6N are used or not.
- Asians are patient long term investors they intend to hold the domains for years.
- So many Chinese businesses are coming online. The future is bright.
- It does not matter how long the domain is if the pattern is good.
- Pictures show Chinese businesses using 8N in the real world, there is real demand for the numerics.

I just have to laugh when I think about it because now just 1 year later the patient long-term wealth building asians are dropping their worthless regs.

Fact is the fundamentals just weren't there and that is why the domains are worthless now.

Fact is the nGTLD don't have much demand or development to show after 2 years and there is no reason to believe that this will change soon.

If you want to hold for another 5-10 years. OK. Let's see then. How many are prepared to pay renewals for 5-10 years?

 

[dordomai]

This is what the result of a real survey look like:
http://www.hosterstats.com/com-website-usage-survey.php

This is particularly worrying because it suggests that there is no analysis of usage at all.

The development and usage in a TLD are actually more complex that it would seem because there are different types of usage. Some sites may not even be in the TLD but are sites from other TLDs where the webmaster has not set up a proper redirect. Wordpress and Joomla installations may be nothing more than a "Hello World" post and nothing more. Registrars and hosters may, if they are not parking undeveloped domains on PPC may have their own custom "coming soon" page. People may have the domain names for sale though they are not posted on Sedo, Afternic or any of the big auction sites. A site could be a brand protection registration where it is not actually a site in that TLD. The site could be compromised/hacked. Measuring all this is actually more complex than saying n% of sites in a TLD are being used. Preselecting sites based on Alexa is very dodgy methodology and the reference to "domain spammers" seems utterly clueless.

Regards...jmcc

I think if a domain redirects to another domain it will show the Alexa rank of the redirected site. Of course a lot of protective registrations forward to the main domain.

 

[jmcc]

I think if a domain redirects to another domain it will show the Alexa rank of the redirected site. Of course a lot of protective registrations forward to the main domain.

About 0.75% of .COM domains in the survey had exact match redirects and 1.58% where redirecting to sites in other TLDs. However redirects are not always set up and the user could be unaware that they are looking at a site from another TLD.

From the full August survey of new gTLD sites (non-idn), 7.61% were Active/unclassified. 16% were holding pages. 8.19% were PPC. 7.27% were for sale. The usage can vary considerably with some of the new gTLDs having an Active % below 2% but .KRED has an Active % of 94.22% and .REALTOR 37.33%.

Regards...jmcc

 

[pfj]

The bottom line is, why set up your business in a marginal extension.

Most domainers aren't running businesses though - they are speculators, gambling on striking it rich. You only need to look at some of the ludicrous domains people register and then post here saying "I think I've got a really valuable domain here!" Most of them are junk. They aren't doing a proper analysis, and they aren't purchasing with margin in mind.

However, i'm sorry to say it, there is no serious money for domainers in the scenario that is playing out and you will not be able to ask big prices for your average to okay .coms with these alternatives either. The premiums already will set you back serious money so you better have huge pockets to play in domains or else it's going to be one big fail short to medium term for all extensions.

I think this is one of the best analyses of this. New gTLDs will be used - yes. I don't think anyone is denying that. They won't replace .com though. Think of it this way: we are only really 10 or 15 years into widespread adoption of the web. ICANN is already gearing up for a second round of new gTLD applications. In another ten or fifteen years the web as we understand it today may not even exist. We may not access information by typing domains or searching in the same way that we understand it now. But what is sure is that there is a flood of options out there.

New gTLDs won't have significant value - unless they are short, intuitive, single word domains that work perfectly in combination with their domain extension -name.pro, injury.lawer, circle.jerk, pink,elephant, flying,pig. As "investment" domains there are too many uncertainties - the stability of registries, the ability for registries to reclassify names as premium, change pricing at will, high renewal fees, etc. Spammers moving in can destroy a domain extension's reputation, devaluing these speculative registrations in a stroke. And then, even after all that, it's down to what catches the common consciousness - will .web beat .xyz? Will .online triumph over .link? No one can say - and we are too early in to divine the future.

In short, I think it's great that people believe that new gTLDs will work out for them. But it's a bet, not a business. It's trying to see into the future and hoping that you're right - too often, though, the people I see posting here aren't basing their futurology on any fact, just hope. They're too invested in their extension coming out top, and have to convince themselves that the money they have spent is well "invested" and not just a huge ill-conceived gamble. That's why people take such entrenched positions in this debate - it's like gamblers with horses; if the jockey gets on the wrong side, they won't bet; if the horse looks at the sky, it's a sign that it will definitely win. NOTHING you can do will shake a superstitious gambler from his strongly held beliefs, and nothing will shake an aspirational domainer from believing he's clever enough to have seen the next big thing before anyone else.

 

[168]

Most domainers aren't running businesses though - they are speculators, gambling on striking it rich. You only need to look at some of the ludicrous domains people register and then post here saying "I think I've got a really valuable domain here!" Most of them are junk. They aren't doing a proper analysis, and they aren't purchasing with margin in mind.



I think this is one of the best analyses of this. New gTLDs will be used - yes. I don't think anyone is denying that. They won't replace .com though. Think of it this way: we are only really 10 or 15 years into widespread adoption of the web. ICANN is already gearing up for a second round of new gTLD applications. In another ten or fifteen years the web as we understand it today may not even exist. We may not access information by typing domains or searching in the same way that we understand it now. But what is sure is that there is a flood of options out there.

New gTLDs won't have significant value - unless they are short, intuitive, single word domains that work perfectly in combination with their domain extension -name.pro, injury.lawer, circle.jerk, pink,elephant, flying,pig. As "investment" domains there are too many uncertainties - the stability of registries, the ability for registries to reclassify names as premium, change pricing at will, high renewal fees, etc. Spammers moving in can destroy a domain extension's reputation, devaluing these speculative registrations in a stroke. And then, even after all that, it's down to what catches the common consciousness - will .web beat .xyz? Will .online triumph over .link? No one can say - and we are too early in to divine the future.

In short, I think it's great that people believe that new gTLDs will work out for them. But it's a bet, not a business. It's trying to see into the future and hoping that you're right - too often, though, the people I see posting here aren't basing their futurology on any fact, just hope. They're too invested in their extension coming out top, and have to convince themselves that the money they have spent is well "invested" and not just a huge ill-conceived gamble. That's why people take such entrenched positions in this debate - it's like gamblers with horses; if the jockey gets on the wrong side, they won't bet; if the horse looks at the sky, it's a sign that it will definitely win. NOTHING you can do will shake a superstitious gambler from his strongly held beliefs, and nothing will shake an aspirational domainer from believing he's clever enough to have seen the next big thing before anyone else.

Most investors of other types of investments don't run businesses either.

“New gTLDs won't have significant value - unless they are short, intuitive, single word domains that work”

THE EXACT SAME APPLIES TO .COM/.NET good advise!

“They're too invested in their extension coming out top” -The same can be said of .comies.
“and have to convince themselves that the money they have spent is well "invested" and not just a huge ill-conceived gamble.” -The same can be said of .comies. The guy that bought katie.com @ namescon was telling himself the same thing when I spoke with him
after the auction. Although we both agreed Tuscany.com was primo!
Convinced, .com is not a gamble, but a safer bet. Better odds. - The true mentality of a gambler!

Dumping quietly going on bits at a time from several experts. Some publicly some not.
Calling it an inventory reduction. Nobody telling newbies not to buy what couldn't be sold.

Most "betting" on New "G's" know .com is a stand alone success, continue to support the legacy and don’t view legacies as competition. It’s an expansion that .com will never be able to accommodate no matter how many .coms are left on the shelf that nobody wants. The same will be true for New “G’s” as well.
I do believe most "investing" in New "G's" agree with what .comies convey AND find value in New “G’s”. Risk takers see both options and choose risk. The risk adverse see both options and choose to wait till the waters warm when the rewards are more easily achieved off the backs of the risk takers that survive. Risk takers know there will be casualties.. What is not at all appropriate is the claims .comies make without backing it up with substantive facts other than the obvious effects of a 20 year monopoly for which enrichment was due mostly to "the only choice" low hanging fruit. There are plenty of avenues for newbies to learn including buying dumb but to suggest in derogatory terms, “We know”, is wrong. To me, as a veteran entrepreneur, many "Experts" may know "the business as usual" but lack basic understanding in market growth, cycles, organic demand, and created demand process on a global scale and choose to wait it out. Nothing wrong with that however if you choose to sideline while others willingly knowingly take risk, then sideline the comments that anyone who doesn't see what you see is ignorant, a gambler, too clever, dumb or superstitious . Risk takers will ignore people who constantly decree the sky is falling. Risk is a perspective some will never adopt. Failure is just part of the game, a component of risk known and not feared. No doubt there will be many investment's flushed down a hole. The same is also true with .com. Not everyone wins at .com either. Dordomai and others love to quote sales, without any acknowledgement of cost, and losses to get to the real numbers and, most high dollar sales are a result of long term holds or “rarity” and flips come easy when you’re the" only viable choice". Not so easy these days, Yes? .Com holders are also trimming the fat lately to make an actual profit. Going forward will require a lot more effort to succeed. Effort most, even for .comies won’t be worth the time because it’s easier to collect a paycheck from RISK TAKERS.
Several facts have been posted. Glossed over by those who think they have a better view than several large players even though they are not in the same league. Not much different than a newbie compared to some of the current experts and like newbies most of the current experts will never get to the big leagues either. Several lists of actual sales ignored. Thousands of .com/.net available that nobody wants! Yet comies holding on, continuing to perceive the world of .com as the only safety, Yes! Convinced, .com is not a gamble, but a safer bet. Better odds. - The true mentality of a gambler!

It should be clear by now not everybody wants or needs .com and yes .com is what most are asking for, for now. The herd mentality will change course. Even animals know not to forage in the same place for too long.
No doubt this is not an environment for the risk adverse. Even in .com, including the most valued. To suggest otherwise is just as misleading as suggesting the New “G’s” are the next best thing. If the equivalent of a highly valued .com is put to use, the dot com is now at risk of TM issues if it’s not in use and resold again and again. That’s one reason the China market is moving to offer Domain+TM. Messy for all domains and the cost of doing business just went up again. It’s important to understand that TM’s can be bought and sold in other parts of the world, without the business! And then get an international TM based on that.
In the United States you have to have a business to get a TM, and the current system would recognize the international TM whether or not it had a live business attached. Again, the valuable dot com is now at risk of TM issues if it’s not in use, continuously changing hands.. TM’s are going to be a much bigger issue for the value in .com than any of the New “G’s”. TM’s will effect values across the board.
New “G’s”,
Did anyone happen to notice the China Market isn’t hotly debating the merits of anything beyond .com?
Buying well beyond .com/.cn in categories they can afford or simply want to collect and trade? The middle investment class is 3 times the entire population of the United States. India, .coms? I don’t think so. They will most likely be trading with the China Market at investment grade as anything of value gets sold out of the American market. The only thing the American market will have left is New “G”’s

IMHO the domain system should REPLACE THE TM SYSTEM, (dated, inequitable) with regulated standard renewal fees and the only factor of possession is being in possession except in a case of obvious targeting. Possession would have a huge impact on value, and replacing TM’s would reduce costs and frivolous legal issues. Abuse can be deterred with a flip of a switch. These issues are what we should be working on. Not whether or not New “G’s” are risky. GEEEZ
WARNING: THE DOMAIN INDUSTRY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. Stand aside and stop with the “ignorant, a gambler, too clever, dumb or superstitious” ,“I told you so” and try to find a more constructive way to convey your opinions and “teach the newbies”. I dare any one of you to personally deliver your message to every corporate CEO investing right now and convey the very same thoughts dumped on anyone who doesn’t “see the same path”. You would be out on your *ss in a nano second if you even got there in the first place. There's a whole lot of people gathering to take this industry to the next level whatever it ends up being we don't know but we do know it is going to another level with or without .comie support. It will always be better for the majority of the value to be with the majority of investors vs a handful of corporate giants. Whatever choice is made, spectate or speculate, Game on!

 

[dordomai]

Most investors of other types of investments don't run businesses either.

“New gTLDs won't have significant value - unless they are short, intuitive, single word domains that work”

THE EXACT SAME APPLIES TO .COM/.NET good advise!

“They're too invested in their extension coming out top” -The same can be said of .comies.
“and have to convince themselves that the money they have spent is well "invested" and not just a huge ill-conceived gamble.” -The same can be said of .comies. The guy that bought katie.com @ namescon was telling himself the same thing when I spoke with him
after the auction. Although we both agreed Tuscany.com was primo!
Convinced, .com is not a gamble, but a safer bet. Better odds. - The true mentality of a gambler!

Dumping quietly going on bits at a time from several experts. Some publicly some not.
Calling it an inventory reduction. Nobody telling newbies not to buy what couldn't be sold.

Most "betting" on New "G's" know .com is a stand alone success, continue to support the legacy and don’t view legacies as competition. It’s an expansion that .com will never be able to accommodate no matter how many .coms are left on the shelf that nobody wants. The same will be true for New “G’s” as well.
I do believe most "investing" in New "G's" agree with what .comies convey AND find value in New “G’s”. Risk takers see both options and choose risk. The risk adverse see both options and choose to wait till the waters warm when the rewards are more easily achieved off the backs of the risk takers that survive. Risk takers know there will be casualties.. What is not at all appropriate is the claims .comies make without backing it up with substantive facts other than the obvious effects of a 20 year monopoly for which enrichment was due mostly to "the only choice" low hanging fruit. There are plenty of avenues for newbies to learn including buying dumb but to suggest in derogatory terms, “We know”, is wrong. To me, as a veteran entrepreneur, many "Experts" may know "the business as usual" but lack basic understanding in market growth, cycles, organic demand, and created demand process on a global scale and choose to wait it out. Nothing wrong with that however if you choose to sideline while others willingly knowingly take risk, then sideline the comments that anyone who doesn't see what you see is ignorant, a gambler, too clever, dumb or superstitious . Risk takers will ignore people who constantly decree the sky is falling. Risk is a perspective some will never adopt. Failure is just part of the game, a component of risk known and not feared. No doubt there will be many investment's flushed down a hole. The same is also true with .com. Not everyone wins at .com either. Dordomai and others love to quote sales, without any acknowledgement of cost, and losses to get to the real numbers and, most high dollar sales are a result of long term holds or “rarity” and flips come easy when you’re the" only viable choice". Not so easy these days, Yes? .Com holders are also trimming the fat lately to make an actual profit. Going forward will require a lot more effort to succeed. Effort most, even for .comies won’t be worth the time because it’s easier to collect a paycheck from RISK TAKERS.
Several facts have been posted. Glossed over by those who think they have a better view than several large players even though they are not in the same league. Not much different than a newbie compared to some of the current experts and like newbies most of the current experts will never get to the big leagues either. Several lists of actual sales ignored. Thousands of .com/.net available that nobody wants! Yet comies holding on, continuing to perceive the world of .com as the only safety, Yes! Convinced, .com is not a gamble, but a safer bet. Better odds. - The true mentality of a gambler!

It should be clear by now not everybody wants or needs .com and yes .com is what most are asking for, for now. The herd mentality will change course. Even animals know not to forage in the same place for too long.
No doubt this is not an environment for the risk adverse. Even in .com, including the most valued. To suggest otherwise is just as misleading as suggesting the New “G’s” are the next best thing. If the equivalent of a highly valued .com is put to use, the dot com is now at risk of TM issues if it’s not in use and resold again and again. That’s one reason the China market is moving to offer Domain+TM. Messy for all domains and the cost of doing business just went up again. It’s important to understand that TM’s can be bought and sold in other parts of the world, without the business! And then get an international TM based on that.
In the United States you have to have a business to get a TM, and the current system would recognize the international TM whether or not it had a live business attached. Again, the valuable dot com is now at risk of TM issues if it’s not in use, continuously changing hands.. TM’s are going to be a much bigger issue for the value in .com than any of the New “G’s”. TM’s will effect values across the board.
New “G’s”,
Did anyone happen to notice the China Market isn’t hotly debating the merits of anything beyond .com?
Buying well beyond .com/.cn in categories they can afford or simply want to collect and trade? The middle investment class is 3 times the entire population of the United States. India, .coms? I don’t think so. They will most likely be trading with the China Market at investment grade as anything of value gets sold out of the American market. The only thing the American market will have left is New “G”’s

IMHO the domain system should REPLACE THE TM SYSTEM, (dated, inequitable) with regulated standard renewal fees and the only factor of possession is being in possession except in a case of obvious targeting. Possession would have a huge impact on value, and replacing TM’s would reduce costs and frivolous legal issues. Abuse can be deterred with a flip of a switch. These issues are what we should be working on. Not whether or not New “G’s” are risky. GEEEZ
WARNING: THE DOMAIN INDUSTRY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. Stand aside and stop with the “ignorant, a gambler, too clever, dumb or superstitious” ,“I told you so” and try to find a more constructive way to convey your opinions and “teach the newbies”. I dare any one of you to personally deliver your message to every corporate CEO investing right now and convey the very same thoughts dumped on anyone who doesn’t “see the same path”. You would be out on your *ss in a nano second if you even got there in the first place. There's a whole lot of people gathering to take this industry to the next level whatever it ends up being we don't know but we do know it is going to another level with or without .comie support. It will always be better for the majority of the value to be with the majority of investors vs a handful of corporate giants. Whatever choice is made, spectate or speculate, Game on!

The problem is that yours is just an opinion and anyone can have one. Anyone can make up scenarios in their mind and you don't have provided anything beyond that. It would take more to convince me.

No one can predict the future but we can study previous launches and make some educated guess.

That is what we are doing. We are not claiming to know everything or being too smart.

In the past we have seen previous launches fail miserably.

We have learnt from that.

it is going to another level with or without .comie support

There are only domain investors and they have never referred to themselves as a .comie. As far as I can tell .comies don't exist except in the minds of some nGTLD surrealists.

Also domain investors have never been interested in .com only and have always at least considered or kept track of other extensions. There is a very simple reason why most prefer to buy .com

There is a market for .com!

Investors are where the money is. You can't blame them for doing that.

If you want to bet on an uncertain future. Fine.

History shows that a few who do that make it big. Most others go broke.

 

[000]

BORDEAUX, THE GLOBAL CAPITAL OF WINE WILL GROW USING .WINE.GLOBAL AND .VIN.GLOBAL

Thanks, I hadn't seen that.

On a related note, I was getting a haircut here in Denver the other day and noticed a .global address on the beverage cooler in front of me... yes, out in the real world!

IDW.global

IDW.com is a parked page. Somehow the .global seems to be doing alright without it...

The more options a company has when choosing their domain, the lower the .com's value goes (for them - but of course other companies will follow suit). This ain't rocket science!

It generally no longer makes sense to pay a huge premium for .com.

 

[Brands.International]

Most investors of other types of investments don't run businesses either.

“New gTLDs won't have significant value - unless they are short, intuitive, single word domains that work”

THE EXACT SAME APPLIES TO .COM/.NET good advise!

“They're too invested in their extension coming out top” -The same can be said of .comies.
“and have to convince themselves that the money they have spent is well "invested" and not just a huge ill-conceived gamble.” -The same can be said of .comies. The guy that bought katie.com @ namescon was telling himself the same thing when I spoke with him
after the auction. Although we both agreed Tuscany.com was primo!
Convinced, .com is not a gamble, but a safer bet. Better odds. - The true mentality of a gambler!

Dumping quietly going on bits at a time from several experts. Some publicly some not.
Calling it an inventory reduction. Nobody telling newbies not to buy what couldn't be sold.

Most "betting" on New "G's" know .com is a stand alone success, continue to support the legacy and don’t view legacies as competition. It’s an expansion that .com will never be able to accommodate no matter how many .coms are left on the shelf that nobody wants. The same will be true for New “G’s” as well.
I do believe most "investing" in New "G's" agree with what .comies convey AND find value in New “G’s”. Risk takers see both options and choose risk. The risk adverse see both options and choose to wait till the waters warm when the rewards are more easily achieved off the backs of the risk takers that survive. Risk takers know there will be casualties.. What is not at all appropriate is the claims .comies make without backing it up with substantive facts other than the obvious effects of a 20 year monopoly for which enrichment was due mostly to "the only choice" low hanging fruit. There are plenty of avenues for newbies to learn including buying dumb but to suggest in derogatory terms, “We know”, is wrong. To me, as a veteran entrepreneur, many "Experts" may know "the business as usual" but lack basic understanding in market growth, cycles, organic demand, and created demand process on a global scale and choose to wait it out. Nothing wrong with that however if you choose to sideline while others willingly knowingly take risk, then sideline the comments that anyone who doesn't see what you see is ignorant, a gambler, too clever, dumb or superstitious . Risk takers will ignore people who constantly decree the sky is falling. Risk is a perspective some will never adopt. Failure is just part of the game, a component of risk known and not feared. No doubt there will be many investment's flushed down a hole. The same is also true with .com. Not everyone wins at .com either. Dordomai and others love to quote sales, without any acknowledgement of cost, and losses to get to the real numbers and, most high dollar sales are a result of long term holds or “rarity” and flips come easy when you’re the" only viable choice". Not so easy these days, Yes? .Com holders are also trimming the fat lately to make an actual profit. Going forward will require a lot more effort to succeed. Effort most, even for .comies won’t be worth the time because it’s easier to collect a paycheck from RISK TAKERS.
Several facts have been posted. Glossed over by those who think they have a better view than several large players even though they are not in the same league. Not much different than a newbie compared to some of the current experts and like newbies most of the current experts will never get to the big leagues either. Several lists of actual sales ignored. Thousands of .com/.net available that nobody wants! Yet comies holding on, continuing to perceive the world of .com as the only safety, Yes! Convinced, .com is not a gamble, but a safer bet. Better odds. - The true mentality of a gambler!

It should be clear by now not everybody wants or needs .com and yes .com is what most are asking for, for now. The herd mentality will change course. Even animals know not to forage in the same place for too long.
No doubt this is not an environment for the risk adverse. Even in .com, including the most valued. To suggest otherwise is just as misleading as suggesting the New “G’s” are the next best thing. If the equivalent of a highly valued .com is put to use, the dot com is now at risk of TM issues if it’s not in use and resold again and again. That’s one reason the China market is moving to offer Domain+TM. Messy for all domains and the cost of doing business just went up again. It’s important to understand that TM’s can be bought and sold in other parts of the world, without the business! And then get an international TM based on that.
In the United States you have to have a business to get a TM, and the current system would recognize the international TM whether or not it had a live business attached. Again, the valuable dot com is now at risk of TM issues if it’s not in use, continuously changing hands.. TM’s are going to be a much bigger issue for the value in .com than any of the New “G’s”. TM’s will effect values across the board.
New “G’s”,
Did anyone happen to notice the China Market isn’t hotly debating the merits of anything beyond .com?
Buying well beyond .com/.cn in categories they can afford or simply want to collect and trade? The middle investment class is 3 times the entire population of the United States. India, .coms? I don’t think so. They will most likely be trading with the China Market at investment grade as anything of value gets sold out of the American market. The only thing the American market will have left is New “G”’s

IMHO the domain system should REPLACE THE TM SYSTEM, (dated, inequitable) with regulated standard renewal fees and the only factor of possession is being in possession except in a case of obvious targeting. Possession would have a huge impact on value, and replacing TM’s would reduce costs and frivolous legal issues. Abuse can be deterred with a flip of a switch. These issues are what we should be working on. Not whether or not New “G’s” are risky. GEEEZ
WARNING: THE DOMAIN INDUSTRY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. Stand aside and stop with the “ignorant, a gambler, too clever, dumb or superstitious” ,“I told you so” and try to find a more constructive way to convey your opinions and “teach the newbies”. I dare any one of you to personally deliver your message to every corporate CEO investing right now and convey the very same thoughts dumped on anyone who doesn’t “see the same path”. You would be out on your *ss in a nano second if you even got there in the first place. There's a whole lot of people gathering to take this industry to the next level whatever it ends up being we don't know but we do know it is going to another level with or without .comie support. It will always be better for the majority of the value to be with the majority of investors vs a handful of corporate giants. Whatever choice is made, spectate or speculate, Game on!

Very well said. There are people which are risk takers, and there are people who are safe players. Both are ok, this is how world functions

 

[Kate]

The more options a company has when choosing their domain, the lower the .com's value goes (for them - but of course other companies will follow suit). This ain't rocket science!

Not that simple.
The relative value of .com is diminished only to the extent of the ability of the alternate TLD to capture registrants that would otherwise have used a .com.
First of all, the first choice for end users is almost always going to be .com (or the ccTLD). if they turn to new extensions it's sometimes for branding reasons but usually it's because they don't want to pay a premium for a domain.
So it's not money lost to the domainer anyway, because the buyer had no intention to buy on the aftermarket. He could have registered a longer .com or another extension.

Second, .com is not the biggest casualty. The collective value of new extensions is driven down because there are too many of them, all competing for a small share of a small pie... So the biggest victims of new extensions are (competing) new extensions.

It generally no longer makes sense to pay a huge premium for .com.

A quick look at DNJ shows that end users are still not getting it...

 

[000]

The point is, as more and more companies use ngtld's, it's getting easier and easier for other companies to also say no to .com, unless it's truly incredible and really stands out (but even then, there are a bunch of new incredible options for most companies to now choose from, instead of very few almost-always-.com options).

For the most part, only the VERY BEST domains (of any extension) will be able to command a great premium anymore.

Good-medium quality .com's will need to be priced more competitively than ever so that the buyer doesn't go with one of the many great new alternatives.

Decent/mediocre domains (.com's and ngtld's alike) will be harder than ever to sell -- and, let's be honest, most domainers have mostly mediocre (or worse) domains (of any extension).

It's now more important than ever to focus on the VERY BEST domains (regardless of extension). No longer can we preach "stick with quality .com's". That is simply NOT the only way to win, and the pool of GREAT .com's is very small/expensive. There are a lot of ways to win that don't require touching .com at all, if you focus on QUALITY.