Discussion in 'Domain Industry News' started by deez007, May 19, 2017.
Yep... End user perception vs Domainer perception ....oh well, indeed.
This was to point out people make bad decisions? haha $90,000 on those domains. And the 2 examples he uses - www.video.games, www.personalinjury.attorney
One is an under construction page
The other forwards to the .com
What matters is perception.... yes many people still have no clue about nGTLD's outside of the domaining world. Having end users, especially internet marketers write articles like this on reputable platforms like Entrepreneur.com goes a long way to start creating awareness...
The negative chatter about nGTLD's is reserved mainly within the domaining community unless you can point me to an article that talks negatively about nGTLD's on a reputable (non-domainer) platform? Not saying it doesn't exist but I have not seen any...
Reality matters. You write an article and the 2 examples you use, a make construction page, and something that forwards to a .com.
Then on top of that, his own sites don't even work yet. Maybe he should have waited until the Summer when they supposedly will. Have to love these guest writer articles.
Reality does matter... the problem is people's perception of reality differs drastically.
My reality says, as per his article. His references was purely on the fact that some other people also paid lot for their domains, his point was that they paid a lot not what they did with the domains.
This is what he said "But I'm hardly alone in paying a premium for an exact-match new domain; others are being sold for five or six figures each, including www.video.games for $183,000, and www.personalinjury.attorney for $60,000"
Then he also clearly states he is still building the startup... so whats the problem with him writing about it now? "The startup I'm currently building aims to modernize real estate marketing, and is scheduled to launch this summer"
Why should he have waited until the sites were launched and ready until he wrote this article? In the context of the article, his sites being live or not is completely irrelevant to his article.
The whole article is a joke. Besides what I already mentioned.
Name dropped a registry and registrar.
Starts off with talking about past .com sales which leads to - "and that's why I believe that new top-level domains (TLDs, meaning the last part of the website name, like .COM) are going to be the digital real estate of the future."
Based on what? Hope?
Not a domain investor himself he says, which doesn't stop him from giving domain investing advice. Nice.
Yes, if you want to talk about your startup, it should actually work. Yes, if want to use examples, they should work as well. There are numerous threads here pointing out most startups are staying away from new gtlds.
Then the 4 reasons he gives are pretty much a joke.
1. Flexibility in choosing a name.
How much did he pay again for those new gltds, $90,000? You very well know the registries are keeping the obvious good ones for themselves. Should they pay $183,000 or $60,000 like the 2 examples used, for a new gtld? You can get a decent .com for much cheaper or make up a name for reg fee.
2. More memorable names
Go back to how much he had to pay. Go back to registries keeping the best names. How it is memorable when most people don't know of these new extensions.
3. Increased Web Traffic
4. Reduced online marketing costs
Because new domains drive organic web traffic to your site, you'll be less reliant on expensive search engine placement and other online ads.
How does that make sense? So .com and other extensions don't drive organic traffic to your site? The extension doesn't really matter as far as that. Long term, you would probably have to pay more, because people aren't familiar with these new extensions. With .com, they just have to remember what comes before the dot.
"Not a domain investor himself he says, which doesn't stop him from giving domain investing advice. Nice"
Yes, cos it gives us an end user perspective. An end user who is also a developer and Internet marketer. Do I agree with his choice in domains and how much he paid for them? Hell no... doesn't detract from the fact that the article will be seen by a massive audience, many of whom are business owners. Will that directly equate to a huge spike in sales instantly?... probably not but what it does do is create brand awareness. I don't fancy any of the nGTLD's that he mentioned in his article, I have my firm favorites that invest in. All I care about is that more business owners will become aware that nGTLD's exist.
What brand awareness? And do you really want to associate it with sites that don't work or forward to the .com? It seems more like an ad to me, hence the dropping of the registrar, registry, his own sites. Why else would you guess post? It's usually to market something/yourself.
Off course there is a level of promotion going on there...so is almost 99% of the content we read every day. That is simply the nature of the beast, marketing! Most of the time people have no clue that they are being marketed too. Again, when I talk of brand awareness...I'm talking specifically about Mr Joe Soap who had no clue about nGtlds...reads the article and thinks, oh now that's interesting I never knew about these... then he heads over to a registrar and pokes around and see's woaaah there are so many of them.... does he go and grab loads of them...probably not. However, now he is at least aware that they exist = brand awareness. So if he is sitting around a BBQ with his friends and one of them is starting a new business venture... Joe Soap pipes in and says "Hey Bob, u know that DogGrooming advice website you thinking about starting..you said you were thinking of DogGroomingOnline.com did you know you can get DogGrooming.online as well?" Now maybe Bob will go with the .online or maybe he won't from there it will depend on personal preference... but brand awareness created that opportunity....
The irony is that the news outlets singing the praises of new extensions are all on .com domains... it kinda dilutes the message.
I have seen quite a few in mainstream publications. Here is one example: a scathing article from 2013
The Guardian: Why new top-level web domains are doomed to fail
These outlets that you talking about, consider the fact that their business is dependent primarily on web traffic. They have thousands and thousands of backlinks, social shares, and press releases and associated email address as well as newsletter subscribers all tied up to their domain..for them to change domain names would insane...
With regards to the article you just share... Yeah, that was the only ONE I could find as well.. when I searched...an article from back in 2013
Here are a few that I remember of and they are not too flattering:
Forbes: Why, Even After A Year, There's Still No Land Grab For New Internet Domains
Bloomberg: Are You a .Ninja or a .Guru?
networkworld.com: The new internet domains are a wasteland
I know that there is much more negative or critical coverage, but I haven't bothered to compile a list.
It's true, they shouldn't change their existing URLs. But many businesses launch new sites from time to time, to promote new products and services or cater to specific markets. They could launch new sites on altTLDs. That wouldn't impact their primary URLs.
(seems the guardian is on both sides of the fence)
And new tlds
Have very little
You do not
A new tld name
if launching news sites is part of their business model then yes, sure they should use nGTLD. However, most of them are simply not launching new sites. It's not like they are launching new sites on .com domains instead of nGTLD's... it;s just that they are simply not launching new sites. Most of them prefer to add more categories on their existing site instead of launching a new site altogether.
thanks for sharing
I think that the key is startup they don't have much money and experience. I know some of my friends when they opened their website they didn't buy .Com, they used ccTLD's & nGTLD's. But now their business have been getting bigger, they want to expand their business to other countries and they have to come back to look for to buy .Com. They have already had a good name on the market at present, so the owner of .Com asking a very high amount to sell their domain. One of my friend has paid $65,000 to buy the .Com domain for his business now, but if he bought this domain before, it would have a small amount. It is a big lesson for our startup.
Seeing more and more of these "lightbulbs" going off in regards to endusers and the new G's. We are seeing niche broadening to mainstream. Yet the deniers will always find an excuse to downplay. That's ok, leaves more of the cake on the table. I like elbow room.
How to compare Casino.online over $200k to Casino.com $5.5M?
I personally believe that branded domain names not keyword domains are the future. People are used to brands in every day life. How often do you see "nice family restaurant" or "good coffee shop" as names for shops or restaurants in everyday life? Also, with so many different extensions available it's hard to build a brand using keyword domains unless you're able to trademark it which it quite difficult to do with keyword domains. One company can be called coffee.shop and the other coffeeshop.com. It will be very hard to differentiate yourself from your competition.
I think you're making the mistake that many domainers make. Just because .COM might be king doesn't mean that the .COM domains YOU OWN are king. I couldn't care less if people are buying houses if they aren't buying the house I'm selling. I personally would rather purchase a new gtld like coffee.shop over its .com counterpart coffeeshop.com.
Maybe you personally, just not smart businesses or people.
I don't think its right for people to try and put down the premise of the article. The article itself is part of the "Take it from the Pros" series on Entrepreneur.com, focusing on small business owners. It's meant to inform and enlighten readers by giving insight based on the professional experiences of successful entrepreneurs.
I'm trying to understand why there is useless sh*t talk at every single avenue when it comes to positive events occurring in the NGTLD namespace. This kind of news is just a part of the natural progression of new gtld's. Domain's like Casino.Live and Homes.Forsale had to be sold in the $xx.xxx-$xxx.xxx range for this to happen. You can't buy eurgoehrgoeh.xyz and expect an to get an article on entrepreneur.com to inform other entrepreneurs about the kind of opportunities New G's bring to the table. I mean what's the point of trashing the article? This guy is 100X more reputable than any of us anonymous posters and his name, brand, business and beliefs are out there for the world to see.
I don't see your point here. Are you saying that smart businesses or people don't buy new g's like coffee.shop? Seems like your insinuating something negative about the intelligence of not only the author but also @Smiles76. Shame on you.
There will be more end users like Robert Bruce , more news and more 5-6 figure sales made in new g's, the ball is already rolling. I think at this stage its actually pointless trying to debate the validity of new g's. Yes, there are some absolutely horribly managed extensions that domainers and end users alike will be vocal about (like .Art for example), but overall there is a lot of positive things going on with New G's. I still hold a heavy dot com portfolio but I'm preparing for the future as consumer sentiments change and online experiences become more efficient. Dot Com will be an ever present figure in this future but New G's will provide end users with increasingly relevant consumer facing domain names.
"Our expectations of the online user experience are changing as we get savvier about navigating to exactly the things we want; and relevant TLDs are going to be a big part of that"
Very important statement. It explains the entire premise of new g's. The segmentation of the internet by organizing domains into different consumer preferences and industry/interest groups. I have said this before and got bashed, but this article makes it pretty clear that I'm not the only who believes this. Diversify and prepare your portfolio's for the coming years....or miss out on the opportunity. It's that simple.
Separate names with a comma.