16 Domain Experts Sound Off in DN Journal's 6th Annual State of the Industry Report

[Ron Jackson]

The January Cover Story is out at DNJournal.com and as we do at the start of every year, we asked some of the industry's leading domain investors and developers, top level company executives, monetization experts and attorneys what they considered to be the most important events and trends of the past year. We also asked them to predict what the biggest developments in 2010 are likely to be. You can read what they had to say here:
http://www.dnjournal.com/cover/2010/january.htm

 

[wot]

Rick Latona "The real growth is going to come from ccTLDs and foreign language IDNs," Latona said.

Better move this to the IDN section, won't be of interest to anybody else :lol:

 

[Ms Domainer]

*

IDNs: yes, a very lucrative area for careful investors who know what they're doing.

However, I respectfully disagree with Rick Latona's view about ccTLDs.

Country TLD's are risky, given that political situations and registrar policies can change in an instant, possibly leaving domain investors hanging out to dry.

This business with .cn should act as a cautionary tale. This may be an extreme case, but even so-called minor changes can have devastating effects on a domainer's portfolio. For example, what happens if, say, the .me registry decides that only Montenegrans can own .me domains or places a high tariff on domains held by non-citizens? These registries can do whatever they wish, when it comes to deciding who can register their domains and who cannot.

Neustar, the .us registry, has been clamping down as well. Twice, video.us has been confiscated from owners who were not U.S. citizens or who did not have a business presence related to U.S. interests. Whether or not you agree with these different ccTLD policies, you can be adversely affected by them.

I believe it's important to invest in one's own ccTLDs and ones that reflect a company's business interests. However, registering odd ccTLDs without understanding the country's culture, laws, and language is a huge mistake.

Remember the .cm debacle? On several blogs, it was touted as the best thing to happen since .com. Then, suddenly, the .cm registrar flamed out, and .cm investors were left with nothing after the bigwigs who had sung its praises bailed out of .cm auctions.

I listen to my own intuition and the results of my own research because the experts can be wrong, too.


*

 

[maxeaus]

Very interesting reading. We see a real trend of bearishness of the advertising model IMO, it's clear that a breakthrough needs to come sooner rather than later.

I always like to read what Rick Latona has to say, "The real growth is going to come from ccTLDs and foreign language IDNs," Latona said.

I will have to politely disagree with Ms Domainer on this and side with Rick.

I'm not that impressed by Shumacher at SEDO, i feel they have really let customer service slide in every area possible to an unacceptable (new) low. Thumbs down big time.

My favourite part was Gregg Mcnair, he seems to have a winning plan centred around CPA which sounds innovative. Of course I'm highly biased though because hes an Aussie! Thumbs up. LOL

 

[labrocca]

Rick Latona "The real growth is going to come from ccTLDs and foreign language IDNs," Latona said.

Better move this to the IDN section, won't be of interest to anybody else :lol:

Rick has proven imho that he can market and sell. He basically creates his own market so if he feels IDN and ccTLD's will sell then I am sure for him they'll sell.

I personally stay clear of both markets.

One reason why Rick might feel it's a growth and opportunity market is that it's not over sold by domainers yet. There are probably more opportunities for Rick to buy low and use his salesmanship to sell high.


I like that Jeff Kupietzky commented about Snapnames. IMHO they'll recover from this. He also sees growth in ccTLD. I wonder if it's because of a weakend dollar. We are seeing a lot of international growth now.

David Castello's comments are idiotic in my view. His statement about Twitter and Facebook giving sub-urls is just stupid. Myspace did the same thing years ago. So did Geocities and Angelfire. His #2 about domain parking and UDRP's is nothing new either. Ridiculous assertions.

Andrew Miller's statement about com's is spot on.

I often ask people to gauge one week of prime time media in the US and tell me at the end of the week how many .COMs they saw, and then how many dot anything else. The answer is almost always, 99.5 percent .COM with a handful of .org, .gov.

I notice that a few mentioned the drop in PPC for 2009 but really hey are only talking about parking incomed drop. Those that developed are doing just fine. 2009 was my personal best year for income.

 

[DNProperty.com]

I found Andrew Miller's comments quite interesting...particularly mentioning Real Names and also whether you have an App or Facebook Page or Twitter site, you will need an online presence with a domain name (to market it to the world beyond those restricted platforms)

 

[labrocca]

I agree. Miller stood out in this story. I like how he mentions Apps too. One of the only guys to do so.

Speaking of which when are we going to have some ladies in the mix?

 

[DubDubDubDot]

Is it just me or is that Fidelity Funding Network mentioned on page 2 a ridiculously stupid TM violation?

 

[labrocca]

It's just you. I don't see what you're talking about.

 

[Ms Domainer]

*

With all due respect to Rick Latona, he also said minisites were the next best thing, and then he sold minisite services for about a year, and when that market flamed out, he pulled out and left his customers high and dry (after promising continuing hosting for their sites).

Now he's selling his minisite domain at auction.

Sure, the model works for him; he's making a lot of money by touting ccTLDs (just as he made money on minisites), and he, and others like him, will oversell ccTLDs until the bottom falls out of the market, and then he'll be off to the next best thing.

No, thanks.

Been there, done that, won't do it again.


*

 

[DubDubDubDot]

With all due respect to Rick Latona, he also said minisites were the next best thing, and then he sold minisite services for about a year

Those sites were so pathetic. He should have at least used a real designer and a decent writer for what he was charging. People could have spent the same at a real design firm and gotten something pretty high end, for a minisite anyway. Instead they got stuck with sites like ShedsForSale.com. I wonder if any of his clients made their money back?

 

[labrocca]

*

With all due respect to Rick Latona, he also said minisites were the next best thing, and then he sold minisite services for about a year, and when that market flamed out, he pulled out and left his customers high and dry (after promising continuing hosting for their sites).

Now he's selling his minisite domain at auction.

Sure, the model works for him; he's making a lot of money by touting ccTLDs (just as he made money on minisites), and he, and others like him, will oversell ccTLDs until the bottom falls out of the market, and then he'll be off to the next best thing.

No, thanks.

Been there, done that, won't do it again.


*

He is the master of hype. I just admire his ability to convince to buy. I am just glad he targets end users. imho you can make money following his lead but you'll lose money if you buy from him.

I would never give him a dime of my money but if I was to imitate anyone in domainer land it would be Latona.

 

[kemjika11]

Andrew Miller's statement about com's is spot on.



I notice that a few mentioned the drop in PPC for 2009 but really hey are only talking about parking incomed drop. Those that developed are doing just fine. 2009 was my personal best year for income.

Andrew Miller basically downplayed any serious ccTLD and he told the truth with that statement, but not the whole truth. Is he saying ccTLDs haven't done well and will not do well? because there are NP members who have made good money selling ccTLDs, so he should accept the fact that even if .com is king, its high prices(for very good names) will drive people to seek alternatives, hence a reason for the market for ccTLDs. That comment is shortsighted.

 

[jns]

Let's see how it plays out, i bump this thread in 1-2 years :lol: