A fresh look at Dot mobi / mobile web

[newdomainer.mobi]

I think this issue kind of swamped the thread it was in
(What will be the biggest flop in '08?)

So I thought I'd air it hear... you'll catch my drift I'm sure although there were some good posts by others (Hawkeye being one) on the original thread which I haven't copied across...

I think it really is time for the commies to drop the pretence that they 'know the answers' and actually bring their case up to date... the old reasons given for the failure of .mobi are just getting really tired now..

So here's some fresh 'food for thought'......

The important thing to note is that no one actually knows the answer when it comes to the mobile web.

I think most people accept that whichever side of the fence they are on... however, it does seem that those who believe that it is doomed always refer to existing, established websites (usually .coms) that have an established presence & they assume that users will either type .com into their PDA etc.. & get the auto detect version of the site, (this assumes that this is what the PDA user wants which removes the element of choice: a major consideration in itself)

The doom-mongers also assume that users are somehow more likely to be aware that they should key in m.site.com or mobile.site.com site.com/mobile than they would be to use site.mobi....
This is an oversight, especially as mobile devices are now coming onstream that require no extension to be used for .mobi sites.

The other assumption is that there will not be a 'cover-all' attitude by site owners who will wish to capture as much of their target audience as possible; by allowing access on all the available routes such as like Fox have done... any route you like; you get there.

Then there is a blind assumption that the mobile web is just 'desktop web' viewed on a small screen device... this to me is the most ridiculous assumption of them all.... large sites = big data volume = slow loading = visual overload = messy = complex = NON user friendly experience.

The mobile web will develop as a close relation of the desk-top web but it will not be the same.... some sites suit desk-tops & just desk tops... I wouldn't want to try & use an autocad programme on my phone for example.... or spreadsheets come to that!

For social uses, video, audio, contacts, GPS, maps, locations, reviews, food, quick reference, impulse buys, last minute info, gifts, traffic, games, etc. etc. etc. there will be a new breed of web site....

The only extension that will ever guarentee a suitable site for a small screen device is .mobi.... all the other extensions will be hit & miss; not every site will have auto-detect, not every site will render well - even with the appropriate software; especially older sites, complex sites etc..

Using m.site.com just gets you to a site that may or may not be suitable for mobile (by that I mean that if you choose 100 random .com addresses & stick an m. in front of it - how many sites resolve as mobile sites & how many servers return no results? - In other words; in order to use m.site.com etc. you need to be aware that the site has a mobile site available, whereas any address that has a.mobi is a site that you can be assured of getting to render on your small screen.

Add to that the fact that this will become more apparent to end users after a period of time; more & more people will start to key in site.mobi in the expectation of seeing a mobile site... when that happens, site owners will not want to lose this traffic & they will need to register / buy the .mobi domain in order to do so, even if they redirect to an m.site.com address.

Then it gets serious; .mobi's become as much a part of the mobile web as .coms are on the desk top.... m.site.com & mobile.site.com will become to the mobile web what the .net / .org / .info is to the desktop web today... the same of country codes; there is a realistic chance that country code mobiles will be released in the next 5 years; so site owners of .co.uk may end up with .uk.mobi or .mobi.uk or .m.uk who knows, but what is for sure is that the original extension (.mobi) will be the .com of the mobile web.... if you have the .com, the logical thing will be to have the .mobi to go with it or the competition will beat you to it.... defensive it may be but its nothing we haven't seen time & time again with every other extension...

In my (humble) opinion I think that the need to have the .mobi will be secondary to your main domain & be ahead of the list of other domains you will need to serve your client base & to protect your market... the only one that comes close is the country code for where you happen to be.

Lets just read this sentence a few times until it sinks in:

"4 devices with small screen web access sold to every large screen web access device sold"

..... that figure is growing; it'll be 5 to 1 before long.....
How long does it take for people to drop their preconceptions and look at the figures?

Of course, all the techies are protective of the internet just the way it was in 2006.... they don't like change!
Forward thinking people accept change, learn the new technologies & embrace the next big thing...

It's not lost on me that most techies that I know (& respect for their knowledge & skills) are still wearing clothes & sporting hair-styles that went out in the late 1980's.... maybe thats a clue as to how long it takes them to get 'with it'

And finally; the other mistake the doomsayers keep making is that they forget that sites are built every day, businesses are set up every day, domains are developed every day.... in time, there will be many sites that don't have a desk-top presence; they will be site.mobi & thats it... no need for anything else, it's taken a long time to populate the internet (& 75% of that is utter crap).
The mobile internet will be populated in half the time (my guess) just remember that nothing stands still, nothing stays the same for long.... the 'mass' internet itself is barely a generation old... it's just a toddler itself... & now it has a baby brother!

Nice Flares by the way Jeff! but the pony tail has to go...

"I am so glad that I followed my own judgement over the past 18 months"

I really am pleased that I am able to write the above (in bold), the reasons why .mobi won't work are growing weaker & weaker all the time.... I am sooo glad that I followed my own judgement.

If I had a tractor factory; I'd have a simple mobile site.... some nice pictures of my latest models, a few spec details... an email address, a 'click to phone' link & a link to my main web-site...

Your argument is so poor & niaive to argue that companies won't bother with mobile web... that comment will be up there with that record label guys comments some time back when he told why he turned down the opportunity to sign the beatles


(Originally Posted by Ergo)
The main problem to mobi is that majooooooority of companies even don't have, never intended and do not plan to have mobile versions of sites. So potential end users for mobi domains is about 1000-10000 times less than for .coms and I strongly believe that even 2-10 times less than for .biz domains that are considered as worst. And among those very small number of potential end users only few will decide to "BUY NOW AT END-USER PRICE OF $XXXX" instead of free and still not bad free decision to place their sites at m.site.com. E.g. I think that imaginary GLM.biz has more chances to find end-user than GLM.mobi because if in 10 years there will be 10 companies with GLM acronym they will try to buy GLM.com, GLM.net, GLM.org, GLM.info, G-L-M.com, G-LM.com, GL-M.com GLMonline.com etc... But what's the reason for them to have GLM.mobi if their business are Tractors, Boats, Agriculture, Dung or whatever else.

mobi is good only when name is connected with mobile world
(End Quote)

Further to your comments Ergo; if I were a farmer - how much time would I spend in the office & how much time out & about? What would be the best way to market to a farmer? .... via his phone? Nah! That would be silly wouldn't it??

I mean, a farmer wouldn't find it useful to visit a suppliers mobile site to order fertiliser at short notice or order more cattle feed, fuel... or even to check the price of beef at the markets so he can decide whether to book the abbatoir next week or wait another week... in fact the list of companies that you use to illustrate why it's no good are perfect to argue to the contrary... to the last one!

You know, the more I think about it, the less uses I can think of for the mobile web



I wouldn't want anyone to rush off & pile into .mobi without due diligence but I will say one thing.... I 1st had a mobile phone in 1990

It was a brick!

It was so expensive I couldn't bear to use it...

Then there was this text / SMS business... whatever the f*** that was!

Do you know, I was a techphobe... I'm still not a gadget man but I spend over 1000 minutes a month on my mobile phone, I send around 400 texts every month, sometimes a lot more... my point being that in 1990 I wouldn't have seen myself making use of these facilities, I was one of those people that got frustrated with the new phones as they came out... all fiddly & too many functions; I just wanted to talk God dammit!!!

I was also a tree surgeon back then... I climbed trees all day & waved a chainsaw around like it was grafted onto my wrist...

Now I use all the phone features I once hated and more,
I can qwerty type & alpha-numeric text faster than ever, I'm an entrepeneur rather than a contractor nowadays so I keep my hands clean (most of the time) which would surprise you if you knew me in my 20's

I also have two kids whom I love more than I could possibly have imagined
(I genuinely never wanted kids - couldn't stand the idea.... until I had them - sound familiar??)...

So, resistance is futile... the mobile web will happen; its far too useful for it not to... many will refuse to participate, many web site owners will buck the trend until they realise that they are losing out to the competition.

Wake up guys, you can choose to be a leader or a follower... but make no mistake you will get on this particular train sooner or later.

(all IMHO of course...)

Ok, this isn't for a debate if you can't think of any meaningful argument... we can just call it educational if you like :hehe:

 

[lzy]

Interesting read. Thanks for taking the time to write this up, I'm sure quite a number of members will appreciate it.

However, I do not own a single .mobi so I should run along now... :music:

 

[tophatter]

Nice reading.I quoted your thread & moved it to the MOBI section..I thought some mobiers wouldn't catch the read at domain name discussion but I do know why you may have put it there.

Regards

 

[RicoShay]

Excellent post, lots of good points. Its not important whether or not I'm a fan of .mobi's - the important thing is that technology evolves and develops and the market for .mobi will most likely grow.

 

[newdomainer.mobi]

Thank you for being so civil... 3 decent replies in a row on a non.mobi thread...
Must be a record.
I appreciate that we all have different views but it is nice not to be lambasted by nutters for once

Good luck for 2008, whichever niche you trade in.

Regards


Gary

 

[Jeff]

... market for .mobi will most likely grow?!?

Some nice thoughts, but still should be in the #1 Namepros .MOBI Forum™. :gl: :imho:

Generally speaking, I think it is extremely naive to think or state that since the Mobile Web is in its infancy and will surely be growing and gaining momentum, that the .MOBI extension will be doing same!
To me, while the Mobile Web is something we should positively embrace ... I believe, at this critical time, the opposite is true of the .MOBI / mTLD / .MOBI "ecosystem". Technology is not an ally of the .MOBI, IMHO.

Just my two sense, and see you soon.
-Jeff

 

[Keith]

Some nice thoughts, but still should be in the #1 Namepros .MOBI Forum™. :gl: :imho:

Generally speaking, I think it is extremely naive to think or state that since the Mobile Web is in its infancy and will surely be growing and gaining momentum, that the .MOBI extension will be doing same!
To me, while the Mobile Web is something we should positively embrace ... I believe, at this critical time, the opposite is true of the .MOBI / mTLD / .MOBI "ecosystem". Technology is not an ally of the .MOBI, IMHO.

Just my two sense, and see you soon.
-Jeff

Why would one not believe that mobi will grow along with the mobile web? So far so good, you can't deny the fact that mobi has made significant progress for being 1 year old.

Mobi has garnered attention from many major corps as well as bigtime domainers. It will be around for some time to come and will continue to grow at a phenominal pace :imho:

 

[Jeff]

Mobi has garnered attention from many major corps as well as bigtime domainers. It will be around for some time to come and will continue to grow at a phenominal pace :imho:

The "progress" that .MOBI has made, for the most part, is limited to its "sales" (to and between Usual Suspects™) and HYPE, IMHO. mTLD abandoned the RFP process, and as a result - and as my Signature correctly states - the critical developed .mobi "ecosystem" is R.I.P.

In answer to your question ... the reason is TECHNOLOGY!
Think about it ... :gl:

Lastly, and certainly of growing MAJOR LEAGUE concern for those holding on to hope with mTLD and the .MOBI extension ... is "backer" Google's very prominent:
mobile.google.com

Technology is providing the impetus away from .MOBI ... and, for those still in denial, validating its non necessity, very clearly! :imho:
-Jeff

 

[mktgmark]

Original Post was very good and informative... I can't say I agree with the entire argument, but there were some decent points to be made. I personally am not too invested in .mobi, though I do have some. I wish all .mobi investors good luck and hope that it does take off.

 

[Work In Progress]

The "progress" that .MOBI has made, for the most part, is limited to its "sales" (to and between Usual Suspects™) and HYPE, IMHO. mTLD abandoned the RFP process, and as a result - and as my Signature correctly states - the critical developed .mobi "ecosystem" is R.I.P.

In answer to your question ... the reason is TECHNOLOGY!
Think about it ... :gl:

Lastly, and certainly of growing MAJOR LEAGUE concern for those holding on to hope with mTLD and the .MOBI extension ... is "backer" Google's very prominent:
mobile.google.com

Technology is providing the impetus away from .MOBI ... and, for those still in denial, validating its non necessity, very clearly! :imho:
-Jeff

Jeff, you might want to let the 3,496 unique visitors (along with their 8,539 page visits) to one of my developed mobi sites this past December know that the extension is now doomed....or R.I.P in your words.

You also might want to check This out

newdomainer....well thought out post that should make many think again

 

[Jeff]

Jeff, you might want to let the 3,496 unique visitors (along with their 8,539 page visits) to one of my developed mobi sites this past December know that the extension is now doomed....or R.I.P in your words.

Seriously. Congrats on your .MOBI development(s), Mark ... is that the one with the m.tapatap.com link in it? :blink:

To clarify, I stated that the "critical developed .mobi "ecosystem" is R.I.P." :gl:
Do you disagree that the (now abandoned) RFP process ... would have helped with an developed "ecosystem"?

Thanks for the article link, as well ... on the basics of the use of the extension. What about the problems with its promotion and branding?
Do you disagree that emerging technologies are currently providing the impetus away from the basic of the .MOBI (and happening much faster than a few non-corporate folks developing their own .MOBI's)?

Thanks for the post and your professional opinions.
-Jeff

 

[Work In Progress]

Seriously. Congrats on your .MOBI development(s), Mark ... is that the one with the m.tapatap.com link in it? :blink:

Thanks Jeff. No. If I have a site with a m.taptap.com link on it, I don't know about it. I do have some .com links on some of my sites, as the relevant sites I would direct my visitors to do not all have mobile sites (yet). If they do though, I wouldn't care in the least bit what it's extension, as long as it works well on a mobile. I will have taken the guesswork out of it for them. The bottom line is, over 2900 of these visitors came from Yahoo SE. Shows you what page 1 results can do.

To clarify, I stated that the "critical developed .mobi "ecosystem" is R.I.P." :gl:
Do you disagree that the (now abandoned) RFP process ... would have helped with an developed "ecosystem"?

Although I know you don't believe nor agree, but I think mTLD made a good move with the developing requirements they stuck on the names. Why wouldn't anyone want to develop a great mobi name? Do they think they'll get a better return on their invest dollar by parking? I think not, and my sites origin of traffic agree. My "parked" stats on the name I've gotten the biggest traffic on was under 10 type ins a month. There was a reason they abandoned the RFP process. Just because they didn't share what that privileged info with us doesn't mean much at all, IMHO. If it were working, I'm sure they would have went full steam ahead. I was just happy they found an alternative outlet to get these names out (and live). Sure, it's a shame about the now infamous Sedo incident. It will be interesting to see how that all shakes out. Bottom line is, no matter the outcome, there will be some folks happy and some folks mad at the final ruling. The worst thing about this is the names in question will probably be stuck in limbo until a judgment / agreement is made.

Thanks for the article link, as well ... on the basics of the use of the extension.

Hmmm, could also be construed as promoting .mobi.....remember that most folks (including readers of Entrepreneur) don't know mobi exists. Only in our little domaining world do we think otherwise.

What about the problems with its promotion and branding?

It's funny how you define "problems" with it's promotion and branding. Seems as if you've been demanding promotion from the beginning. There are 2 roads mtld (and backers) could have went with.

1) Take a huge chunk of their advertising budget and plop it down, making the general public aware of dot mobi and what it's intentions are (as a mobile-friendly brand) before or while there are few dot mobi sites in existence. Could you please tell me the up-side of why they should have went this route? And don't revert back to the same old, RFP argument please. It's dead. It's gone. They tried it. It didn't work. Time to move ahead.

2) Take some reasonable time to let the .mobi extension "come to life" or mature, with development that people can actually access when they find out about it. People going to check out mobi sites that are parked pages (most leading to non-compliant links) would be a quick death, IMHO. This route will obviously be a longer one than choice #1 above and many will "give up". Does this mean it can't or won't take off? The process of getting out the premium names and waiting on getting them developed is sound, IMHO. Will they go back on their word if not developed within the limits? It would be against their best interests to do so. Mobi's need development to succeed. Just because the majority of domainers can't understand this concept doesn't mean the end is eminent.

Do you disagree that emerging technologies are currently providing the impetus away from the basic of the .MOBI (and happening much faster than a few non-corporate folks developing their own .MOBI's)?

Disagree? Wth you? Surely , you jest.... :hehe: Newer emerging technologies will always be around the next corner. But how long will it be until these new technologies are in the hands of the majority of end-users? Maybe 10 years from now. Maybe not. Plenty of time for mobi to gain mass recognition though. Not all of us can afford to have the latest and greatest tech toys. The "Joe LunchBucket" type of consumer who has a basic Nokia (and will probably have it for several more years) will determine the lions share of mobi's success, not "Timmy TechHead". Not everyone can or will have a smart phone. And even those that do seem to still have the same slow loading of full sites they always have not to metion the tiresome zooming and scrolling involved to see the "full web". Auto-detection and the likes are just "ducky" as long as the website is set up for it. That's the biggest problem as I see it. With m.anything, or just the basic .com (auto redirected) you go into it blindly, not knowing if you'll be going to a mobile friendly site (as you will with a mobi). Takes away the guessing.

 

[Jeff]

Thoughtful post, Mark ... and though I humbly disagree with many of its core points, it's very refreshing to read an intellectual and thorough post (versus most of the drivel of hype, one-liners, and personal assaults that I regularly see from 2 - 3 of the most misguided .MOBI supporters!), IMHO. :music:

Although I know you don't believe nor agree, but I think mTLD made a good move with the developing requirements they stuck on the names.

I do disagree (versus the formerly advertised RFP process), but time will tell ... they also broke a promise, in that the RFP's would have "levelled the playing field" - for the sake of short-term GREED IMHO.

Will they go back on their word if not developed within the limits?

I believe they will, and the aforementioned (minimal) "development requirements", then, will have been a moot point ... again, with the guise of "getting them out there to be developed" - but the ultimate goal of making as much as possible with the premium auctions at Traffic and Sedo. I've always stated ... that the loosely defined (minimal) "develpment requirements" don't mean much if they're not defined and then ENFORCED. Do you think they will be enforced?
April Fool's Day!!

Thanks again for the intelligent post.
-Jeff

 

[Work In Progress]

I believe they will, and the aforementioned (minimal) "development requirements", then, will have been a moot point ... again, with the guise of "getting them out there to be developed" - but the ultimate goal of making as much as possible with the premium auctions at Traffic and Sedo. I've always stated ... that the loosely defined (minimal) "develpment requirements" don't mean much if they're not defined and then ENFORCED. Do you think they will be enforced?
April Fool's Day!!

Thanks again for the intelligent post.
-Jeff

To answer your question "Do you think they'll be enforced?". Yes, I do. Let me preface by stating I'm not a lawyer, nor do I claim to have any legal background. Just my opinion. I'm not sure how long the "take away" process would be, but I'm guessing that they (mTld) would give the owner (ie winning bidder...let's not go there Sedo auction participants) warnings of some sort. If said owner decides to ignore the request(s), the name(s) should be taken back, pronto. (or ASAP) What some seem to forget is that we're talking about a pretty substantial company (mTld) that have a lot to loose. You mention the "loosely defined" soft language in the minimum developments. This works both ways. It can simply allow mTld to treat each case (or name) on a case by case basis. "Minimal requirements by a $500K company are quite different than minimal requirements of a $15 Mil company.

Again, the bottom line is, a simple site that offers relevant content is better than a parked page or a re-direct to a non compliant .anything.

You can believe what you want. You have stated many times that mTld is out for the quick buck (see above for latest). You're entitled to that opinion, as I am mine. I believe that mTld is in this for the long run. There's a lot of big $$$ to be made in renewals. Quite a bit more than initial registrations, as a matter of fact.


Can you provide us all with a list of the RFP applicants and their development plans that were so wrongly pushed aside so mTld could get more money? This would help clear the air about how wrong mTld has been to just dump the idea. If you ran this company and clearly saw a "better" overall alternative than your original plan, wouldn't you owe it to your employees (and stock-holders) to do what's best for the long term?

There are many major players at mTLD now. They didn't just fall off of the turnip truck. They run a business. Is making money to not only fund the future of your business, but also to advance and procure it's health at the same time a good move? I think so. Making money is good for a company. I'll rest at night knowing they're going to be around tomorrow.

 

[Jeff]

If you ran this company and clearly saw a "better" overall alternative than your original plan, wouldn't you owe it to your employees (and stock-holders) to do what's best for the long term?

There are many major players at mTLD now. They didn't just fall off of the turnip truck. They run a business. Is making money to not only fund the future of your business, but also to advance and procure it's health at the same time a good move? I think so. Making money is good for a company. I'll rest at night knowing they're going to be around tomorrow.

If I ran mTLD, first I'd fire the whole lot of 'em ... and, then, I'd live up to the promises that were made IMHO ... and, as it is now, this is simply not the case with the revolving door of folks that are there now, in my view. I think very little of this company, and know about as much as you regarding their private potential RFP dealings or undisclosed backings by the "backers" ... what we ALL know now, though, is that mTLD abandoned the RFP process in order to make as much money as they could! Two things will kill you every time, greed and fear ... and their greed led to the FIASCO with Sedo! These last two points cannot even be debated, in my view! :yell: :imho:

Is Google a "major player" in the .MOBI? :gl:
How much do they back it? Then why do they promote mobile.google.com?!?

Who's more "major" than Google? :blink:

I lose sleep every night that folks still cannot see the obvious, humbly. :zzz:

I appreciate your thoughts and respect your opinion though, Mark.
Happy New Year to you and yours! :santa:
-Jeff

 

[Devil_Dog]

Can we just move this entire thread to the mobi forum?

 

[Jeff]

PS. :gl:

Some nice thoughts, but still should be in the #1 Namepros .MOBI Forum™. :gl: :imho:

Happy New Year! :santa:
-Jeff

 

[Work In Progress]

If I ran mTLD, first I'd fire the whole lot of 'em ...

Makes me glad you're not my boss....

what we ALL know now, though, is that mTLD abandoned the RFP process in order to make as much money as they could!

Please take the "we" out of this statement. YOU might know this, but nobody else here does (other than mTld). You have just told us you don't have any insider info on why the RFP process was dropped, yet you continue to drag their name through the mud throwing out accusations that you can not back up with facts. You simply "feel" and "assume" they dropped the process exclusively for more money.

These last two points cannot even be debated, in my view! :yell: :imho:

Wrong again...just did

Is Google a "major player" in the .MOBI? :gl:
How much do they back it? Then why do they promote mobile.google.com?!?

Again, I'm not privy to Google's advertising plans. My crystal ball is not working as well as yours. Chances are, they'll promote it when they feel the time is right. Not when I want them to. I can accept this

I appreciate your thoughts and respect your opinion though, Mark.
Happy New Year to you and yours! :santa:
-Jeff

Back at ya Jeff....

Can we just move this entire thread to the mobi forum?

Gotta throw Jeff a mobi bone every now and then... :hehe:

 

[Jeff]

Can we just move this entire thread to the mobi forum?

Gotta throw Jeff a mobi bone every now and then... :hehe:

:lol:

Touche. :music:

Goodnight for now, friends.
-Jeff

 

[newdomainer.mobi]

Jeff, I have defended you in the past when others haven't been so kind..

However, I really can't accept your constant 'empty' drivel....

You aren't making any valid meaningful points these days... (I would be gracious enough to agree that some of your points had merit)

The mobile web is too young to measure... it took several years for the internet to take off, the mobile web is evolving faster.... many applications are going mobile; there is plenty of room for .mobi detractors but I am tiring of your nonsense.

Devil Dog: why do you want this thread moved? It says quite clearly that this is a .mobi discussion!!! I placed it in general discussion (It's not called the .com discussion) because I am keen to encourage discussion between those domainers who aren't currently looking at .mobi...

Have a listen to this interview, it's not hype, just valid comments from someone with a great deal more expertise than Jeff

http://podcasts.networkworld.com/panorama/2008/010808-pan-dotmobi.mp3

Please lets discuss the mobile web, not Jeffs needle stuck in the record diatribe...

Regards to all.

Gary

 

[Jeff]

A.g.e.n.d.a.

However, I really can't accept your constant 'empty' drivel....

So you publicly "bumped" this thread after FIVE DAYS of inactivity ... rather then simply PM'ing me?

Two quick points; I am the one who first used the term "drivel" ... describing the uneducated, unsubstantiated "hype" and personal attacks from 3 - 4 of the most juvenile .MOBI supporters here in the #1 Namepros .MOBI Forum™. And, it's obviously a time of increased frustrations with resepct to .MOBI - but you still could have PM'd me directly rather than this public - and, seemingly, desperate admonition, IMHO. :red:

Advances in technologies for the greater Mobile Web are occurring much, much faster and more seemlessly than the acceptance or branding of the .MOBI ("dot mobey") extension and its critical "ecosystem" ... of course, time will tell! :gl: :imho:

Relax, and see you next ... on April Fool's Day, friend.
Thanks for understanding.
-Jeff