share your .app sales
Indeed. Not just angry, but pure belligerence seemingly out of no where, constantly attempting to railroad every .APP related thread into an argument. Forcibly trying to turn people's opinions just because they don't agree with someone liking a domain or an extension. No one's forcing anyone to buy domains, you don't need to "help" we're clearly all unanimously agreed that it's speculation! Arguing it out is futile.The .app domain extension seems to make some people here very angry?!
Clearly .APP isn't like .HORSE at all - pull the other one.Talk is cheap, we heard the same thing from the people that brought us .horse, they ended up being kicked out from their own company a few years later.
Looking forward to hearing the details!U will come to know soon.
Sales thread..deal probably will finalise in a few days will reveal the price once finilise but but in good price.
What does .app offer that .com doesn't, other than a targeted extension? Much more narrower word, not made to be as broad as .com. Just like most other new gTLDs. None will ever "replace" .com, and this so-called shift will be imperceptible at best in the short-term. In general, apps are a pain in the ass, limited to mobile devices and limited in functionality, and are only a sliver of what a computing program is capable of. An app is not even a website, but a secondary function to one.Pure speculation on my part. Just a trading theory you might say. It's much more technical than you might think but I do think we are going to see a shift from .com..
Yes, .horse has twice the amount of documented sales to date, I would deem most .app registrations with $500+ annual renewals to be a bad investment going forward.Indeed. Not just angry, but pure belligerence seemingly out of no where, constantly attempting to railroad every .APP related thread into an argument. Forcibly trying to turn people's opinions just because they don't agree with someone liking a domain or an extension. No one's forcing anyone to buy domains, you don't need to "help" we're clearly all unanimously agreed that it's speculation! Arguing it out is futile.
Clearly .APP isn't like .HORSE at all - pull the other one.
Looking forward to hearing the details!
Still waiting, probably?deal probably will finalise in a few days will reveal the price once finilise but but in good price.
Personally, I think that BTCPRO.APP sounds much better than BTCPROAPP.COM does. Adding the .com just makes it confusing. The .APP gtld makes it sound much smoother and much more professional.
Whoever purchased it paid $12K EAP, plus $250 annual renewal.Host.app has a bid of €12000
On Sedo 7 day auction
No such look there I'm afraid. It was registered at 2018-05-02T23:33:14Z so more like $3k EAP.Whoever purchased it paid $12K EAP, plus $250 annual renewal.
After paying sedo at that price, they would be under.
dl.app $50k why???
Even if it may stand for DownLoad still...
Thanks for noticing. That is even worse lolAlso it's EUR, not USD, so it's like 59.000 USD. I also wonder who buys that?
No ones bought it. Its the asking priceAlso it's EUR, not USD, so it's like 59.000 USD. I also wonder who buys that?
Thanks! So "gays.app" wasn't sold for 1 million like it was assumed?
It was Gay.app not Gays.app that's being discussed.Thanks! So "gays.app" wasn't sold for 1 million like it was assumed?
Also, it's interesting that people bid on "realestate.app", because we also own "realestates.app" which should be better to sell.
Downloading an app will be obsolete by 2023. Apps will be streamed to devices and from objects to devices.
Granted, that claim is a tad ridiculous especially with a specified year. However what can be said is that Google is pushing towards experiences that needn't be downloaded (Instant apps, PWA), its pretty much all they banged on about thay their little conference thingy. I think the point is a tad moot though. A website can be an app, take Discord for example. It isn't uncommon for web apps to be referred to or presented as apps (Facebook web apps being a big one).What sources or research do you have to back up such a claim?
What sources or research do you have to back up such a claim?