Hello everyone
Google bought X.Company from the first owner was Chinese person so Google use that name for X project .
X.Company
Well, sales are the goal right? So it shouldn't be "or not". And the Coca-Cola reference means nothing, since there are many more companies that failed. And if I used those as an example, that wouldn't matter either because we're just talking about the .company extension. Also, earlier you said something about how many .com were sold in first 10 years. When they first came out, you couldn't use them for websites since browsers didn't exist yet, there were no sites back then.
You should look at .company sales (lack of really), it's been around pushing 3 years now.
You should look at keywordcompany.com sales.
Study the market. Good luck.
not should
could is a better advice
still you are not the measure of all things
boatcompany.com 897 USD
salmoncompany.com 405 USD
flowercompany.com 1,225 USD
fitnesscompany.com 988 USD
candlecompany.com 2,075 USD
robotcompany.com 817 USD
yachtcompany.com 661 USD
seafoodcompany.com 1,279 USD
You forgot about:
thecompany.com was sold for $37,500 USD in 2013
so my THE.COMPANY looks very good.
Comparing apples to oranges: "the .com sold for $$$$ therefore my new gTLD domain is worth at least $$$".thecompany.com was sold for $37,500 USD in 2013
so my THE.COMPANY looks very good.
Comparing apples to oranges: "the .com sold for $$$$ therefore my new gTLD domain is worth at least $$$".
It doesn't work like that. And many sales are one of a kind.
The real question is, are .company domains selling at all ?
Comparing apples to oranges: "the .com sold for $$$$ therefore my new gTLD domain is worth at least $$$".
It doesn't work like that. And many sales are one of a kind.
The real question is, are .company domains selling at all ?
Whether something is selling or not depends on a variety of different variables. .COM has had decades of use and is a fully developed TLD. .Company has been around for less than 5 years. So your right that you can't compare them but its very clear to see that one is more efficient than the other. Every sale is one of a kind and you continue to make the argument that sales in the gtld are flukes, without ever knowing the risk appetite, tendencies and attractiveness of the name to the buyer, this kind of thinking is wrong. With your logic every ngtld sale is a fluke/defensive registration and you would only come to that conclusion with a very rigid and unyielding way of thinking. It's high time you open your mind and actually research this ngtld rather than provided this thread with a baseless and uninformed commentary.
The real question is, will you continue to think inside the box?
Whether something is selling or not depends on a variety of different variables. .COM has had decades of use and is a fully developed TLD. .Company has been around for less than 5 years. So your right that you can't compare them but its very clear to see that one is more efficient than the other. Every sale is one of a kind and you continue to make the argument that sales in the gtld are flukes, without ever knowing the risk appetite, tendencies and attractiveness of the name to the buyer, this kind of thinking is wrong. With your logic every ngtld sale is a fluke/defensive registration and you would only come to that conclusion with a very rigid and unyielding way of thinking. It's high time you open your mind and actually research this ngtld rather than provide this thread with a baseless and uninformed commentary.
The real question is, will you continue to think inside the box?
XYCOMPANY.COM domains are not selling that much. at best low 5 figures.
even if xy.company were better than xycompany.com they wouldn't be that successful.
I don't understand why people keep making assumptions. "They", "Shouldn't", "Wouldn't" ,"Can't" ...why not just do the research yourself?
It is the next economical step in the evolution of the internet. In an over-saturated market like .com there is declining marginal utility and very little choice in what to own/use for a business looking to go global, unless they want to pay top dollar. NGTLD's provide consumer choice and that creates more competition which reduces the prices of low quality/mediocre domains in every gtld both new and old.
everyone makes assumptions. What else can we do? You aren't making assumptions?
I did my research and that is why I came to the conclusion that nGTLDs will never be as valuable as a .com within the next 10 years and very likely beyond that.
In domains being the second best choice never paid well. Look up .net sales. Aside from a few ultra premium keywords they never did well. Premium keywords are for the most part reserved by the registries.
Either you are first or you aren't worth much. .com is first not because it is so great, it never was. It is first because it is the first choice.
With the Billions that have been spent on branding .com in the past 20 years, ngtlds will never become popular enough to be first, maybe theoretically 30 years from now but not within a timeframe that interests me.
that's why you will never get top dollar for your .company
I don't think you understand. Surface level arguments will never get you anywhere. The speed at which the internet is innovating and expanding enables things to develop a lot quicker than "30 years", we don't live in the stone age. Just this past week there was just under 1 million NGTLD registrations so the growth at the moment is exploding.
Comparing .NET to NGTLDS is also highly illogical. Why compare something that doesn't make sense with 99.995% of keyword string domains(of course excluding names like Fishing.Net )
I highly doubt you did proper research because if you did you would have also realized that increased internet penetration and economical growth in emerging countries coupled with the need to globalize businesses in those countries increases the attractiveness of NGTLD's over their own cctlds in comparison to .com which is a highly saturated market.
NopeIs Google taken Domain Name Siliconvalley.Company xD !?!?!?!
how many of these are NOT registered by Chinese speculators or protective registrations? 70% are parked.
About half of the regs are below $1 promotions. These are worthless.
these are for the most part not legit regs.
Since when is someone paying for something not legitimate?.
I mean honestly with your logic you could say that 90% of 4L, 5N .com sales are by Chinese speculators/ protective registrations.
) and half of the regs are below $1 promotions(would like to get a source for that number)
So since you have all the domain and internet answers...care to share your super premium .com domains that are stellar? Let's take a look?everyone makes assumptions. What else can we do? You aren't making assumptions?
I did my research and that is why I came to the conclusion that nGTLDs will never be as valuable as a .com within the next 10 years and very likely beyond that.
In domains being the second best choice never paid well. Look up .net sales. Aside from a few ultra premium keywords they never did well. Premium keywords are for the most part reserved by the registries.
Either you are first or you aren't worth much. .com is first not because it is so great, it never was. It is first because it is the first choice.
With the Billions that have been spent on branding .com in the past 20 years, ngtlds will never become popular enough to be first, maybe theoretically 30 years from now but not within a timeframe that interests me.
that's why you will never get top dollar for your .company
Your aptitude is stellar.I don't think you understand. Surface level arguments will never get you anywhere. The speed at which the internet is innovating and expanding enables things to develop a lot quicker than "30 years", we don't live in the stone age. Just this past 1.5 weeks there was just under 1 million NGTLD registrations so the growth at the moment is exploding. There is no "never" this kind of thing is inevitable, you just don't have the capacity to understand it and are making uninformed arguments to support your own deluded conception of how things are going to be. I have already provided highly reputable evidence suggesting the logical path towards the future of DNS, by the person who created the entire DNS system Paul Mockapetris, so you can thank him for warning all ngtld haters of the inevitable future.
In regards to whether or not I can get top dollar for my ngtlds. The NGTLD market will get flooded, making the great names you see in this thread and others appreciate more in value because they are in the top 1% of their respective registry. Scarcity increases value and when they are only a few hundred high level names for every ngtld , increased saturation will only bring their prices higher and those of lesser quality lower...thats just how things develop. I highly doubt you did proper research because if you did you would have also realized that increased internet penetration and economical growth in emerging countries coupled with the need to globalize businesses in those countries increases the attractiveness of NGTLD's over their own cctlds in comparison to .com which is a highly saturated market. In 5 years the internet will be completely different than it is now and in 10 years it will be even more dissimilar. Throwing out random numbers like "30 years" means you really don't understand how quickly things are moving.
Comparing .NET to NGTLDS is also highly illogical. Why compare something that doesn't make sense with 99.995% of keyword string domains(of course excluding names like Fishing.Net )? Just because its a legacy tld does not make it attractive. Work.Place will always be better than WorkPlace.net and same with Easy.Credit, Simple.Tax and the long growing list of others. When your selling physical products being first to market matters, however, when it comes to the internet, being first to innovate matters even more because the degree of effectiveness is on a much larger scale. Efficiency is what drives markets further and when something becomes obsolete, its not long before its thrown to the curb, just take a look at Yahoo for example, its a shadow of its former self because it failed to innovate. I'm not saying that will happen to .com but don't be surprised when your $10-$500BIN domains become worthless in a few years. NGTLD's will be cheaper for now there is no arguing that but I think you'll be surprised at how quickly they'll appreciate and maybe a bit saddened when you didn't do the research and get high quality names at the right time.
.Mobi is a poor example, how can you compare that with keyword string domains? You can't there entirely different breeds. Its like looking at a minature pony compared to a young racehorse...one has the potential to get on the track and pay off the investment its owner has put into its development, the other...although it may have sincere intentions is more of a vanity buy than anything else at this point. I mean who would use EasyCredit.mobi over Easy.Credit....one is gold the other one is an aged lump of coal. The two things your arguing are relevant in .com as well so its not like zombie regs and a protective ownership are a new trend. This is what made high level .com's more valuable and it will do the same with NGTLDs.if someone is buying a domain based on the concept of the greater fool theory it is not legit.
These type of names will invariably drop because they were not owned by end-users and have no long-term value.
Protective regs made by brands won't advance the cause either. They are zombies that inflate the zone but never result in usage.
Most regs that have been made so far were zombie regs. The numbers look good superficially but there is little usage that is the problem.
.mobi is another example of this. A lot of regs but in the past 10 years I have not used one single .mobi site.
So since you have all the domain and internet answers...care to share your super premium .com domains that are stellar? Let's take a look?
Mobi is a poor example, how can you compare that with keyword string domains? You can't there entirely different breeds. Its like looking at a minature pony compared to a young racehorse...one has the potential to get on the track and pay off the investment its owner has put into its development, the other...although it may have sincere intentions is more of a vanity buy than anything else at this point.
Always the same worn-out argument, the Internet is changing fast, therefore new extensions will become valuable somehow. It's never been like that.The speed at which the internet is innovating and expanding enables things to develop a lot quicker than "30 years", we don't live in the stone age.
Just by the numbers they should be mainstream now. Obviously it isn't the case and looking at the numbers alone is misleading. After all .tk is the biggest ccTLD.Just this past 1.5 weeks there was just under 1 million NGTLD registrations so the growth at the moment is exploding.
I don't think he has endorsed new extensions as a valid investment strategy. Being in favor of new extensions is one thing, but the state of affairs is a total mess because the new extensions program has been poorly carried out. There are too many extensions right now. By the way, Vixie, another Internet pioneer is not mincing his words: http://www.zdnet.com/article/new-top-level-domains-a-money-grab-and-a-mistake-paul-vixie/I have already provided highly reputable evidence suggesting the logical path towards the future of DNS, by the person who created the entire DNS system Paul Mockapetris, so you can thank him for warning all ngtld haters of the inevitable future.
Scarcity increases value... wrong. Scarcity does not increase value when there is no end user demand. This is wishful thinking. Right now, you're trying to convince yourself you're holding valuable inventory.The NGTLD market will get flooded, making the great names you see in this thread and others appreciate more in value because they are in the top 1% of their respective registry. Scarcity increases value and when they are only a few hundred high level names for every ngtld , increased saturation will only bring their prices higher and those of lesser quality lower...thats just how things develop.
The Internet is changing fast. On the other hand, protocols (that includes the DNS) are awfully slow to change.In 5 years the internet will be completely different than it is now and in 10 years it will be even more dissimilar. Throwing out random numbers like "30 years" means you really don't understand how quickly things are moving.
Why aren't new extensions mainstream and popular if the underlying figures are so amazing. For sure there is more to the story.
#FoolsGold
"I think it is a money grab. My own view is that ICANN functions as a regulator, and that as a regulator it has been captured by the industry that they are regulating. I think that there was no end-user demand whatsoever for more so-called DNS extensions, [or] global generic top-level domains (gTLDs)," he said.
Vixie sees the demand for the new domains as having come from "the people who have the budget to send a lot of people to every ICANN meeting, and participate in every debate", that is, the domain name registrars who simply want more names to sell, so they can make more money. But these new domains don't seem to be working.
"They're gradually rolling out, and they are all commercial failures," Vixie said.
Always the same worn-out argument, the Internet is changing fast, therefore new extensions will become valuable somehow. It's never been like that.
Just by the numbers they should be mainstream now. Obviously it isn't the case and looking at the numbers alone is misleading. After all .tk is the biggest ccTLD.
I don't think he has endorsed new extensions as a valid investment strategy. Being in favor of new extensions is one thing, but the state of affairs is a total mess because the new extensions program has been poorly carried out. There are too many extensions right now. By the way, Vixie, another Internet pioneer is not mincing his words: http://www.zdnet.com/article/new-top-level-domains-a-money-grab-and-a-mistake-paul-vixie/
Scarcity increases value... wrong. Scarcity does not increase value when there is no end user demand. This is wishful thinking. Right now, you're trying to convince yourself you're holding valuable inventory.
There is a reason why the majority of domain sales reports are made of legacy extensions. End users willing to spend some money on a domain name will usually not consider new extensions as a first choice.
The Internet is changing fast. On the other hand, protocols (that includes the DNS) are awfully slow to change.
I think the most important trend is the continued shift toward ccTLDs. How many end users care about new extensions... in the real world. Why aren't new extensions mainstream and popular if the underlying figures are so amazing. For sure there is more to the story.
#FoolsGold