Dynadot โ€” .com Transfer

.co $6 million wasted on .co registrations.

SpaceshipSpaceship
Watch

Do you think .co will be a success?

  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.
  • Yes

    75 
    votes
    35.2%
  • No

    101 
    votes
    47.4%
  • Unsure

    37 
    votes
    17.4%
  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.

Impact
148
$6 million wasted on .CO registrations.

I am somewhat surprised at the level of interest in .co over the last couple of days, from bloggers claiming it is now in the "top 4 extensions" and being worth 10% of a .com to others talking about developing these names and other madness.

A few comments about .co,

1. In my view the main appeal with this extension is typo traffic. Having said that, looking at some Alexa rankings, compete scores and Google Adwords data I would say only the very best generic .co's are going to get much traffic. The registry made a calculated decision when deciding to go public. The main area is likely to be โ„ข names (registry passes the buck). Even then it seems the registry has done a good job connecting with big sites. Still I think the โ„ข typo area is the main opportunity.

2. Considering point one, that these names are totally confusing, how does it makes sense to consider developing these names names.

Would you develop a misspell?
Would you develop a .cm?
Then why would you develop a .co?

The extension is going to be totally confusing for the average person on the street. .biz would be a better choice for development.

3. Reg fees - they aren't cheap and it is going to suck out a lot of the profitability from these names. Whatever value was there is 25% of that with reg fees 4 times higher than other extensions.

4. It's different this time! Isn't it?

.ws, .cc, .tv, .biz, .info, .us, .eu, .mobi, .tel, .me.

Supposedly with every new extension it is going to be different. There is always some compelling reason or argument as to why the latest extension will succeed where other have failed. People will debate it for the next year or two.

In reality it never is different. People get excited for a few months. .co is cool and new, and the fact that nobody actuallly uses it isn't that important yet, after all there is time for growth. Then interest wanes, things turn out not quite as planned. A year later everyone is dropping. People then get angry with the registry saying a lot was promised and not delivered.

Why do the same mistakes keep getting repeated? The registry is setting people up for today, the day when they part with their money and register 200,000 .co names. Most of the money goes into the launch and promoting premium auctions. Afterwards doesn't matter much. Get ready to be strung along a lot.

6. Staged sales/usage: You've been sold to!

disrupt.co, t.co, o.co

There is not much genuine news in this. Disrupt.co was part of an advertising deal. Did you really think techcrunch just chose to use that name? o.co, a sale that appeared a few hours before the launch, the registry is pouring some fuel on the fire here. They want to get you excited for today.

7. Who is even using this extension?

This is .mobi all over again, instead of the big backers who weren't really backing (Google, Microsoft etc) we've got 3 well known sites supposedly adopting .co (Twitter, Overstock, Techcrunch), do you think these people will be anywhere near the extension in 12 months time? How significant is this usage anyway, a url shortener? Overstock doing a url redirect to their main site? Techcrunch promoting a site for a week or so?
 
Last edited:
2
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
GoDaddyGoDaddy
.co never ever can't replace the .com !!
trust me.. did u think all web industry can easily change their domain extension to .co?? like facebook.co / google.co to be a main URL address = NO!!

.com aways save in our people mind(since internet started) ..

I agree with you to a point. I fore see the country codes becoming a factor here very soon, The internet has grown to proportions that countries will begin to us their country code extension to frequent web sites that pertain to their lives in their countries IMO

I am not quite sure what to make of Columbia as a big internet player. I haven't done any research.

I do have a frequent tendency to type in .co and leave out the "m" , I think that in it self will bring .co traffic, If nothing else.
 
0
•••
Country codes are already widely used, especially in places like Spain and Germany, where .es and .de are the preferred extensions. It's just that in the US, .us is seen as third or fourth tier at best, because people tend to think of .com as our extension.

Considering ccTLDs and non .coms were the leading sales in DNJournal for the last two weeks, it's clear they're playing a larger role.
 
0
•••
Country codes are already widely used, especially in places like Spain and Germany, where .es and .de are the preferred extensions. It's just that in the US, .us is seen as third or fourth tier at best, because people tend to think of .com as our extension.

Considering ccTLDs and non .coms were the leading sales in DNJournal for the last two weeks, it's clear they're playing a larger role.

True Dat, But all have yet to peak, India is growing into .in and co.in as we speak. The USA will begin to use Dot US once corporate America uses it exclusively. At this point and time, Change would be very good for the internet, As well as the domain name industry. Then one has to ask, Will .com depreciate, Is Sex.com being sold because the .xxx extension is coming, And will devalue the .com , With all that said, Will million dollar .com names, reduce down to $100,000 resale value. After all, If countries are using their code. Sex dot ? whatever country actually has the same value as .com IMO.

Then comes the next fall, .net and .org , Most country codes offer a .org version of their own country code.

Only the future will tell, But i am optimistic that change is coming, And for the better of the internet, As well as a possibility of stimulating the domain name industry.
 
0
•••
Its very simple, if you are not getting any Type In traffic from .co domains (assuming some people are going to type domain.co instead of domain.com, domain.co.uk, domain.co.in, domain.co.cctld), this extension is no different than other country codes.

Sure, if you are going to develop the domain for Colombia or otherwise, then we are not comparing the same thing here. With the right amount of resources, we could develop any domain extension to rank on the search engines (for the most part). The valuation will be based on the Colombia market.

The added hype here for .co is purely based on Type in (Trickle down traffic) and by now we should have the stats in hand for the domains we hold. We are talking generic domains only, branded TM names may do better (but your asking for trouble)

(As an example: for a search term that gets about 100,000 searches per month, lets say you get 1-2 percent type in traffic - equates to 2000 per month and if we assume 10 percent of that to be Typos in .co, you get about 200 per month - 10% typo in .co might be generous)
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Soon it will be goodbye .Co (R.I.P) and hello Custom TLD's - IMO
 
0
•••
From thedomains.com: E.Co Back Up For Sale But Now The Price Is $500K

I say good luck with that.
 
0
•••
0
•••
10% typo in .co might be generous)

I have never in my life, that I can recall, typed in .co. If I had I would have immediately hit back and tried again. 10% is EXTREMELY high based on my personal usage.

I have often typed in .cm which annoys me but even this far less than 1% of the time.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
I have never in my life, that I can recall, typed in .co. If I had I would have immediately his back and tried again. 10% is EXTREMELY high based on my personal usage.

I have often typed in .cm which annoys me but even this far less than 1% of the time.

I think the .CO typo is more like 1 in 500 or 1 in 1000. Also, with autocomplete in most browsers that number goes down even farther.

For generics .CO typo traffic will be minor. The only time you will get major traffic is TM typos that get millions of hits per day.

Brad
 
0
•••
You notice none of '.CO is the NEXT GOD' posters are actually buying any .co, only selling? :p

It should be a source of 'some' traffic, beyond that, don't see any mass adoption by existing companies anytime soon.

Still, money to be made I'm sure, you just need to get your timing right.
 
0
•••
I expect it to be a haven for tm squatters and scammers alike and not much else.

And phishing - and that is, imo, what will drive the final nail into the co-ffin. The extension will get an unsavory reputation and end users will want nothing to do with it.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
You notice none of '.CO is the NEXT GOD' posters are actually buying any .co, only selling? :p

Yes, and most of the premium .CO owners were awarded their domains without competition. They were not acquired in the free market vs other interested buyers.

When you acquire premium names without competition it seems like it is in your self interest to hype the extension. Take the cash and move on.

Brad

---------- Post added at 06:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:50 PM ----------

And phishing - and that is, imo, what will drive the final nail into the co-ffin. The extension will get an unsavory reputation and end users will want nothing to do with it.

Yeah, it is too easy for phishing. You don't even need to send out phishing emails.

Let's say you buy a domain like BOFA.co

1.) Setup a spoof Bank of America website
2.) When typo traffic goes there it will look legit.
3.) Capture login info.

I think the credibility of this extension will be eroded when people realize it is mainly for typos and is in reality the ccTLD of Colombia, not what they are marketing it as.

Brad
 
0
•••
And phishing - and that is, imo, what will drive the final nail into the co-ffin. The extension will get an unsavory reputation and end users will want nothing to do with it.
IMO that is a valid concern.
Soon we are going to see a lot of disputes stemming from bad faith (TM) registrations, and a lot of bad press. This time, it will be mentioned that .co is indeed the TLD of Columbia (not exactly a country with a squeaky-clean reputation).
 
0
•••
IMO that is a valid concern.
Soon we are going to see a lot of disputes stemming from bad faith (TM) registrations, and a lot of bad press. This time, it will be mentioned that .co is indeed the TLD of Columbia (not exactly a country with a squeaky-clean reputation).

Yeah, let's not forgot this registry is being run by Colombia. I am not sure you can trust a country with the track record of corruption when it comes to running the registry in a fair and honest manner.

I think the vast major of mainstream media coverage will be in regards to the negative aspects of .CO (squatting / phishing).

Brad
 
Last edited:
0
•••
I think the .CO typo is more like 1 in 500 or 1 in 1000. Also, with autocomplete in most browsers that number goes down even farther.

For generics .CO typo traffic will be minor. The only time you will get major traffic is TM typos that get millions of hits per day.

Brad

I have however seen a number of people type .com when advertising their latest .co registrations... :hehe:
 
0
•••
I have however seen a number of people type .com when advertising their latest .co registrations... :hehe:

Yes, I have done it many times as well when meaning to type .CO

.COM is far to established in the world for anything to challenge it. Even in 2010 there are 2M+ .COM registrations per month.

That is a problem with developing a generic .CO - the amount of traffic it will drive to .COM will be a major problem.

Brad
 
0
•••
When .TV was making GD money it was โ€ a globally recognised extensionโ€,number 2 in the drop down and Bob even had his own .TV site,then when Bob wanted a piece of the premium pie and Versign told him where to go, he could not wait to point out .TV is cctld of Tuvalu,Now .co is flavour of the month, no mention of it actually being the cctld of Columbia,and again we have another โ€œGlobally recognised extensionโ€.
 
1
•••
For the first time in 4+ years, I have the same opinion of Snoop.

.co = useless

These days I don't even type in URLs almost anymore due to auto-complete and other Chrome features.

But I disagree on the similarity with other extensions mentioned by Snoop:


.ws = totally useless
.cc = got some use in the past
.tv = great idea, but just a different flavour.
.biz = useless
.info = got some use, mainly in Europe
.us = got some use in the Usa and it may be used more in the future .eu = got some use in Europe
.mobi = got little use, especially in Europe
.tel = totally useless
.me = totally useless

I'd say that .co falls in the "useless" category, except for Colombia.

I did not order any .co and the fact that "O.co" was "sold" (maybe....) for big bucks does not change my view at all.
 
0
•••
I agree with snoop on this one.
I was wading in to make the point about phishing concerns, but I see enlytend has beaten me to it.
I may get one .co to protect a .com from phishing, but only after I've seen some evidence/statistics relating to typos. Although it pains me to think about throwing money at another registry, for the benefit of the users I'd consider it...


PS everyone - It's spelt COLOMBIA


Oh and this was hilarious...

.CO is glowing at rocket speed while .COM as been growing slowly by age like a turtle.

In 5 years i expect .CO to kill .ORG and .NET or reach the same level as .COM

Thank you so much for making me laugh really hard. I almost had tea over the laptop which would have been an expensive disaster.

You understand though, I can't let these type of comments sully my NamePros experience?
 
0
•••
The .COM fan boy arguments:

- .COM is old and .CO is new, therefore .CO sucks.
- .CO is for Colombia, therefore .CO sucks.
- .CO is a typo of .COM, therefore .CO sucks.

Is that all you haters have to say?
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Dynadot โ€” .com TransferDynadot โ€” .com Transfer
Appraise.net
Spaceship
Domain Recover
DomainEasy โ€” Zero Commission
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the pageโ€™s height.
Back