I think there is a decline in demand and price of .com domains because of new gTLDs. What's your opinion ?
Yes, theory...when you sell a cctld to a EU company and you ask them if they don't want the .com as well and they say no, than you offer them to give them for free and they still say they that don't need it and you call this theory.
That way they have paid xxxx for a ngtld or are paying premium renewal when .com .net and the others are available.you think that .com doing poorly means your nGTLDs sell. Not the case really. You could outlaw .coms and most business would shift to .net and ccTLDs and your .longwords would still not have value.
It's not relevant, he said that because I've sold some expiring domains cheap here, than my opinion about domains it's not relevant, so I wanted to prove that everybody is doing it. Also, saying that he has a master in business he's right and the rest of us we don't know anything about business, so our opinion is not valid, so I had to to prove that he's business degree is not more valuable than the business experience of others.I can't see how this doxing is relevant to the discussion.
I may have sold a few names over here for $50 ea in the past. Some liquidation sale that was not even representative back then, and even less today.
So what ?
Way to put up a straw man there. I'm not defending the new names, but surely some potential buyers would think twice about paying the premium for a .com.why spend millions on branding when you can get your company brand IMega-Zone.biz for regfee?
Way to put up a straw man there. I'm not defending the new names, but surely some potential buyers would think twice about paying the premium for a .com.
In the past I have purchased .com names for development. Not anymore, my business model relies on search engine traffic. I don't see the point to pay for the .com when I can outrank it with one of the new extensions. Maybe I'm the only person on the planet not paying a premium to get the .com, but I kinda doubt that.
You're completely different from a lot businesses tho. Real businesses aren't reliant and only think of search engine traffic, they think bigger picture. If you just want some little, reliant on search engine traffic site, it doesn't matter what extension you use.
If I had a "real" business I would purchase the .com. My little sites do just fine without it. All I can say as an individual, I'm not buying .coms anymore for development. So that money is off the table, I'm probably not the only one.
No, people from the start have used different extensions, this isn't new. But bigger companies understand why you get the .com.
If I had a "real" business I would purchase the .com. My little sites do just fine without it. All I can say as an individual, I'm not buying .coms anymore for development. So that money is off the table, I'm probably not the only one.
yes but the thing is that this type of exact match alternative domains make only sense for small sites.
If you are going to build for the long-term and invest some money I would not build on a subpar URL.
If you have only 20% of people not remembering your URL or being confused by it you could fail in a highly competitive field.
You need something that people know and trust and recognize which is .com
The alt registries want to tell us that their domains are as good as .com or even better but this is not true. .com has a far higher brand value because of the billions that have been spent on promoting it. Everytime you see a website URL you promote .com, every time you see an ad with an URL you promote it. .com is one of the most if not the most visible brands in the world. It is virtually everywhere. These days people spend a lot of time online almost every day and .com follows them everywhere they go.
There is no way that word.word or word.ws is a valuable and recgnized as .com and that is why prices and sales for alt extensions will never be close to .com
I don't know much domaining.. But because of gTLDs, the value of .COM is gone up.
you think that .com doing poorly means your nGTLDs sell. Not the case really. You could outlaw .coms and most business would shift to .net and ccTLDs and your .longwords would still not have value.
I don't trust opinion poll surveys because they are generally inaccurate and have small sample sizes. In Europe, certainly in Western Europe, the ccTLD dominates its local market. The .COM has gone legacy in most of these countries and usage and development in the ccTLDs numerically outstrips .COM usage and development. The reason for this is simple: most business is local. That means that people are more likely to use a local ccTLD website because it has a higher level of trust and identifies the business as being local. The .COM has no such loyalty.I've tried to find a statistic made by a australian company related to tld usage in europe, but I can't find it right now. They have asked random peoples in each country what site they will use/trust first if they want to shop/need info: example.fr(for France) or example.com/ngtlds
The result was between 61% to 87% will choose the cctld, the 61% being in UK, the average being around 80% in most countries. So, when you have 80% of the customers choosing a cctld, why would you want to use a com to loose tones of traffic? Also, 2,6% were saying that they will trust a ngtld, the example being a .insurance domain, for auto insurance.
The .COM is the de facto US ccTLD and most .COM registrations are on US hosters and registrars.Regarding .com being considered more as US tld than international I don't know about any statistic, but I can tell you what business owners and customers with whom I interact are saying and I'm dealing with peoples from 7-8 european countries, so it's not something true for just an area.
When it comes to large brands, the TLD does not matter. People identify the brand not the TLD.It's simple, go on the street and ask peoples with what they associate example.com and example.it, or more accurate something like amazon.com and amazon.it and you will notice the response.
The .US ccTLD has been chronically undermarketed for years. It really should be at the 50 million registrations mark or higher. But that's a different subject.In reality it's exactly the same, they use .com for US market and cctld for the rest of them, so probably it's their fault as well, if you ask somebody in Europe what tld they will use if they want to buy from a company from US, over 90% will say .com, I don't think you will find to many(if any) who will say something about using .us
Most endusers really haven't a clue on data protection and privacy issues.Also, .com being controlled by US government and US laws doesn't help, it's a difference of views between EU an US, from data protection to laws, that the 90% of business owners will choose to be protected by Eu laws in contrast with US laws, so being protected by local governments it's another plus for using a cctld.
In most countries with a strong ccTLD, there's a point where the number of registered ccTLD domain names exceeds the number of .COM domain names and after that point, the .COM plateaus. The high volume growth in that market generally switches to the ccTLD. The .COM domain names are still used for international commerce but the bulk of the .COM registrations in such a country are old registrations.As far as I know in Australia is the same, the wast majority will use a com.au than a .com, excepting hotels and international companies.
There are some more implosions on the way in new gTLDs that used heavy discounting to drive registrations. However, it is not all doom and gloom. Some of the new gTLDs that have higher than .COM registrations fees have good renewal figures. Some of the Chinese gTLDs are highly speculative in nature and they depend heavily on discounting for their domain name counts.There are a few gTLDs that have become quite problematic due to the use of discounting. Development and usage has declined dramatically in these gTLDs and the quality of sites in these gTLDs is affecting renewals.We are now down to about 20 million new TLDs from almost 30 million only six months ago (wow 9 million drops in six months). A portion of those were 1 cent to $1 promos but given the number of premium renewals on average new TLDs are probably not renewing at less than $10.
Remember the Domain Tasting issue pre 2010? That's the environment that most of these brand gTLDs were worried about. Thousands of brand name domain names were being tasted each day and it wasn't economically feasible for the brand owners to take action against all of them. So there was an artificial demand and a strong economic argument for a brand gTLD. But ICANN introduced a "restocking fee" for domain tasting based on the number of Add Grace Period domains deleted each month. If the registry tasted more than a particular percentage, the fee kicked in and almost overnight, high volume domain tasting was killed off. Unfortunately the brand owners were locked into the application process and while major threat to their brands had subsided, most of the proceeded but did not really do anything with their gTLD.What I find truly shocking is the lack of confidence in companies that have applied for their own strings. For example, Apple, Microsoft, still doing nothing with their corpTLDs. Then you have Canon, Barclays, hailed as success stories, yet they still have plenty of links to their .com or subdomains on their home page. Totally botched.
I am seeing some usage of new gTLDs in the surveys and a few of them are already showing similar levels of usage to non-core gTLDs. For early market gTLDs, that's quite good. However, a few of them are nowhere near such usage levels.PS: remember what some NP members were saying when the first batch of nTLDs was released. "Give it 3-5 years and new extensions will be mainstream, they will be everywhere, it will be a landslide". Sometimes people overestimate the pace of change.