50 companies changed their .COM to a new gTLD

[Fancy.domains]

Hello,

An article with examples of companies using a new gTLD, rather than its original .COM address:

http://blog.europeandomaincentre.com/why-50-websites-dumped-com-for-new-tld/

 

[Enfant]

com represents the word "commercial," and is the most widely used extension in the world. Most businesses prefer a .com domain name because it is a highly recognized symbol for having a business presence on the Internet. Therefore, com for me is meaningful.

Also, JB Lions already stated all the reasons why it is meaningful. Again, it's my personal experience - I normally confuse co with com.

And just a question: when you drink Coca Cola, do you just drink established brand or do you care about your drink being meaningful?

And honestly, if I know the business in real life and I need to read its website, I will definitely read their website, whether it's co, new, club, etc

 

[Namer Pro]

Right now It's too early to know what's a good move or a bad move as far as gTLDs go. The only problem with them is the public's inability to understand and/or remember the gTLDs. com/net/org needs no introduction, whereas these do. I say the individual companies ability to market their new extensions will be the deciding factor.

 

[Namer Pro]

Which has what to do with new gtlds? There is also a lot of failure in the world. But there will always be random fly fishermen. Change usually happens when something better comes along, some advancement etc. There is none here. These are more options when you can't get a decent .com, not a replacement. .com is too well known and used, way too far ahead. Even it's closest competitor, .net isn't even at 13% of regs. There is not going to be any changing on who is #1, the only possible shuffling will be in the lower ranks.

You might be surprised, sure it won't happen overnight, not even a year, perhaps not even a decade, but a lot of this depends on marketing. Look at .co's for example, poor marketing, overstock even switched back to their .com from o.co due to losing much traffic to o.com. The similarity between the two TLDs .co and .com is easy to find where the confusion could be, .com is older and more "Wired" into our heads. Backed with very poor promotion of .co's in general, a few short godaddy commercials, and the o.co are the only things I remember.

This opens up thousands if not millions of potential opportunities for businesses to get a domain they want, and that they can use. If www.WellsFargo.bank comes out, there is no "o.co" type confusion here, people will know what it is, and that extra ."somenewgTLD" raises awareness about them in general.

In order for this to be a success you need the big players in the world to shift to new gTLDs, and adopt a new way of thinking. Considering most are already sitting on the valuable .com's they wanted they might not be so quick to jump on them.

Point is, we don't know what is in the future, nobody does, change can happen. The biggest changes in history have been the least expected, and some did not even make sense. David beats Goliath sometimes.

 

[Namer Pro]

Not to "us", but to coming generations.

Same reaction first time grandma saw a flat screen TV

My thoughts exactly.

We are "wired" to think in terms of ".com/net/org"

 

[JB Lions]

David beats Goliath sometimes.

Nobody is going to beat .com which almost has 118,000,000 regs, and growing, nobody. It's a basic looking at the numbers. I've asked this many times before and not 1 person could give me the extension that could do it. Not sure why some of you keep putting up this no win scenario, it just makes you look silly. Niche extensions by definition can't, so what's left are generics and most to this point suck. The only one that has the possibility of doing any real numbers is .web and even with that, I don't think they ever get past .net.

Not sure what .bank has to do with anything since it's not something you're going to be regging and selling. So if a few use it, so what.

If the conversation was more, some businesses might use some of these here and there, ok. Of course, that's nothing new. Businesses from time to time have used alternate extensions. .com is still going to be far and away the #1 extension, being used, being sold, in demand etc.

Was curious, so I checked

This year so far, 90/100 top sales were .com
http://www.dnjournal.com/ytd-sales-charts.htm

I picked a random year from the past to see what it was, 2008

It was 81/100 .com, so this year is even better than the past

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/domainsales/2008/ytd-sales-chart-2008.htm

 

[Namer Pro]

Nobody is going to beat .com which almost has 118,000,000 regs, and growing, nobody. It's a basic looking at the numbers. I've asked this many times before and not 1 person could give me the extension that could do it. Not sure why some of you keep putting up this no win scenario, it just makes you look silly. Niche extensions by definition can't, so what's left are generics and most to this point suck. The only one that has the possibility of doing any real numbers is .web and even with that, I don't think they ever get past .net.

Not sure what .bank has to do with anything since it's not something you're going to be regging and selling. So if a few use it, so what.

If the conversation was more, some businesses might use some of these here and there, ok. Of course, that's nothing new. Businesses from time to time have used alternate extensions. .com is still going to be far and away the #1 extension, being used, being sold, in demand etc.

Was curious, so I checked

This year so far, 90/100 top sales were .com
http://www.dnjournal.com/ytd-sales-charts.htm

I picked a random year from the past to see what it was, 2008

It was 81/100 .com, so this year is even better than the past

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/domainsales/2008/ytd-sales-chart-2008.htm

Should consider brushing up on your history. Plenty of things people thought were "impossible" or "impractical" happen all the time.

On the subject of .bank, you may want to reread what I said, it was used to make an example, one that you have clearly have failed to understand.

You are so focused on what YOU can buy and what YOU can sell, these are not the only factors lol.

Stop being so narrow minded, and take a moment to reread everything I said, as well as pick up a history book.

Thanks.

 

[JB Lions]

Should consider brushing up on your history. Plenty of things people thought were "impossible" or "impractical" happen all the time.

On the subject of .bank, you may want to reread what I said, it was used to make an example, one that you have clearly have failed to understand.

You are so focused on what YOU can buy and what YOU can sell, these are not the only factors lol.

Stop being so narrow minded, and take a moment to reread everything I said, as well as pick up a history book.

Thanks.

I know history, what does that have to do with this conversation? Focus on the subject. What extension is going to do it? Step to the plate and let everybody know what extension is going to beat .com. Just even one person out there.

 

[Namer Pro]

I know history, what does that have to do with conversation? Focus. What extension is going to do it.

Sigh...

Some people just don't get things.

Meditate on it, maybe it will click.

 

[JB Lions]

Sigh...

Some people just don't get things.

Meditate on it, maybe it will click.

Exactly. You can't. Because if you did, it would look silly. Your reply is silly. Pick up a history book? We're talking about this, nothing else. You want to talk about some history that has nothing to do with this business, as if domain history doesn't exist.

.net, 103,000,000 behind .com

http://www.registrarstats.com/TLDDomainCounts.aspx

Stop and actually think about that for a second. The next best generic choice is .net. Look how far behind. But some magical new extension is going to jump all that and beat .com. You can see what extensions are here already, what's coming up. Pick one. Anybody.

 

[Namer Pro]

Exactly. You can't. Because if you did, it would look silly. Your reply is silly. Pick up a history book?

.net, 103,000,000 behind .com

http://www.registrarstats.com/TLDDomainCounts.aspx

Tell you what buddy, you take a moment to reread my post, stop being so defensive, then I will explain to you why history factors into things. lol

 

[Namer Pro]

Exactly. You can't. Because if you did, it would look silly. Your reply is silly. Pick up a history book?

.net, 103,000,000 behind .com

http://www.registrarstats.com/TLDDomainCounts.aspx

Stop and actually think about that for a second. The next best generic choice is .net. Look how far behind. But some magical new extension is going to jump all that and beat .com.

There I liked your posts, now you should calm down a bit.

 

[MarkedMarket]

There are only a limited amount of new gTLDs that are available (e.g. - .research does not exist for some reason), so for all logically sounding 1, 2, 3 or 4 word phrases for which there is no available gTLD, the .com extension remains the preference in my view. Statistically this would mean that .com would still remain the dominant extension, since there are far more words in the English dictionary than only those that are part of the new gTLD program.

Moreover, a lot of the gTLDs will likely not make it in my view. Which respectible organization or person wants his products or services to be associated with a .suchs extension? It might only be a one-off joke for a certain occasion and some brands might be able to use it for a special campaign, but in general suchs.suchs in my view. And there are many other extensions with similar or different problems. E.g. I personally like .expert more than .guru - but they have more or less the same meaning. So I would expect that one of the 2 will become redundant.

So only a very limited subset of the new gTLD program could/would in my view make sense. We all know the intuitive 2 word phrases (e.g. beach.club, property.investments, etc) that are very easy to remember, as there is no need to remember on which extension (.com, .net, .org., etc.) they end.

So I think there is certainly room for certain gTLDs, but that it will remain very difficult to challenge .com, simply because .com has the seniority/credibility that they built up over 30 years and because the .com extension makes sense for almost all letter/word combinations.

 

[Namer Pro]

There are only a limited amount of new gTLDs that are available (e.g. - .research does not exist for some reason), so for all logically sounding 1, 2, 3 or 4 word phrases for which there is no available gTLD, the .com extension remains the preference in my view. Statistically this would mean that .com would still remain the dominant extension, since there are far more words in the English dictionary than only those that are part of the new gTLD program.

Moreover, a lot of the gTLDs will likely not make it in my view. Which respectible organization or person wants his products or services to be associated with a .suchs extension? It might only be a one-off joke for a certain occasion and some brands might be able to use it for a special campaign, but in general suchs.suchs in my view. And there are many other extensions with similar or different problems. E.g. I personally like .expert more than .guru - but they have more or less the same meaning. So I would expect that one of the 2 will become redundant.

So only a very limited subset of the new gTLD program could/would in my view make sense. We all know the intuitive 2 word phrases (e.g. beach.club, property.investments, etc) that are very easy to remember, as there is no need to remember on which extension (.com, .net, .org., etc.) they end.

So I think there is certainly room for certain gTLDs, but that it will remain very difficult to challenge .com, simply because .com has the seniority/credibility that they built up over 30 years and because the .com extension makes sense for almost all letter/word combinations.

Nice input. Completely agree.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

So Google isn't controlling Google.com or YouTube.com? Who else can control them?

gmail.com--i.link is one I saw the other day, meant to phish.

The owner of com--i.link can phish a lot of .com sites with success. However with .gmail, to pull off that same type of attack, .gmail--i.link would have to be registered - and that is a lot easier to catch as it is registered by scanning whois registrations.

 

[Namer Pro]

Of course that security advantage doesnt apply to consumer extensions, but when corporations embrace new TLDs it will validate extensions like web, tips, estate etc simply by increasing awareness and trust in these extensions. That's my point and a fair point if I may say so that most will neglect or talk away.

Yay, somebody here understand the "complexities" of conceptual brand awareness! Lol. At least I'm not the only person.

 

[vicky4712]

Your article makes a lot of sense and is a small example about things to come in future.Now what is happening gradually is that slowly and slowly the new gtld's are starting to make their mark online.They're providing some serious competition to .com since more and more people're getting aware about their presence.This is going to have a significant impact on the .com value in coming future.Sooner or later we might see a time when .com would be viewed like any other tld.

 

[vicky4712]

New generations are coming. New ideas, new tactics, new thoughts.

But I don't understand why Paris Fashion Week replaced their .COM with a BUZZ. Are they sponsored?

Probably they want to create a "buzz" about their event.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

Probably they want to create a "buzz" about their event.

Yeah, if you have a good .com it is silly to replace it with something else.

I have a few .ngTLDs that I would replace with .com if it was affordable but I wouldn't do the other way around.

Right now [whatever].com is generally better than [whatever].ngTLD if the [whatever] is equivalent. I think the ngTLDs are going to get better but they won't ever exceed .com except in very rare cases where the ngTLD acts as a keyword itself (e.g. .radio for an Internet radio station)

ngTLDs right now are good when the .com you want is expensive.

 

[atinc]

Hello,

An article with examples of companies using a new gTLD, rather than its original .COM address:

http://blog.europeandomaincentre.com/why-50-websites-dumped-com-for-new-tld/

Thanks, great article!

 

[Kate]

And the sequel...
https://www.namepros.com/threads/50...or-a-new-top-level-domain-or-did-they.973699/