report .app/.com cross-zone analysis

[Kate]

In this exercise we are going to compare .app registrations against .com.
The same exercise can be applied to other nTLDs.

Materials needed:

• .com zone file
• .app zone file

I used today's zone files.
The counts are as follows:

• .com: 133051790 unique domains
• .app: 198097 unique domains

The goal is simple. For every .app domain registered and found in the .app zone file, let's find out if the .com 'counterpart' is registered. For the purpose of this analysis the counterpart means this: domain + 'app' + .com
For example if abc.app is registered, we check if abcapp.com is registered. We could also check if abc.com is registered, as there must be a few domains registered in .app that are available in .com (and other extensions)

I will spare you with the scripting here, and cut to the chase.
Out of 198097 .app domains, 45876 'counterparts' are found in the .com zone file. That is 23.16%.
The difference is 76.84%. So that means that three quarters of all registered .app domains are not registered in their .com 'equivalents', if only for defensive registration purposes.

In my humble opinion, it is not a good idea to register a nTLD while leaving the .com counterpart unregistered. Why: bleeding traffic, defensive registration etc.

Also, buying something.app when somethingapp.com is not even registered suggests that it is a dubious investment in the first place, because the demand for the combo does not even exist in .com.
Again, just imho.

Besides, the vast majority of registered domain in .app probably don't make sense, and are not really usable for any practical purpose.

 

[mr-x]

How do you get a copy of the zone files?

 

[Mopho]

Nice comparison.

 

[Kate]

How do you get a copy of the zone files?

For gTLDs: Centralized Zone Data Service
For the .com zone file you have to apply with the registry (Verisign) direct.

 

[bluemeteor]

For gTLDs: Centralized Zone Data Service
For the .com zone file you have to apply with the registry (Verisign) direct.

Could anyone apply them? Free?

 

[wayne wooldridge]

Could anyone apply them? Free?

Yes, anyone can apply and its free.

 

[Kate]

Yes, but you will have to submit dedicated IP addresses in your application. Only those IP addresses will have access.

 

[Mopho]

...the vast majority of registered domain in .app probably don't make sense, and are not really usable for any practical purpose.

Well, if you consider that a TLD has a purpose besides marketing and popularity, you might think otherwise. For .app, having a secure way to enable browser non-ecosystem programs to migrate from the Microsoft desktop to non OS specific devices, it’s a game changer.

 

[JB Lions]

For .app, having a secure way to enable browser non-ecosystem programs to migrate from the Microsoft desktop to non OS specific devices, it’s a game changer.

What does that mean exactly? You can do what with these, that you can't do with something else?

 

[bluemeteor]

What does that mean exactly? You can do what with these, that you can't do with something else?

I think the translation is exe file to web app, with https. The answer is it has nothing to do with .app tld, at all.

 

[Mopho]

What does that mean exactly? You can do what with these, that you can't do with something else?

I think the translation is exe file to web app, with https. The answer is it has nothing to do with .app tld, at all.

Some TLDs will have more of a purpose. For .app, you need to agree that you will use https. Because apps will run on .app. It’s not just about marketing your “app” on .app. TLDs are designed for function, for resource location.

 

[Premiums]

.app its just a new .mobi/.tel

 

[JB Lions]

Some TLDs will have more of a purpose. For .app, you need to agree that you will use https. Because apps will run on .app. It’s not just about marketing your “app” on .app. TLDs are designed for function, for resource location.

So no real game changer.

 

[Iam_leun]

Also, buying something.app when somethingapp.com is not even registered suggests that it is a dubious investment in the first place, because the demand for the combo does not even exist in .com.
Again, just imho.


I agree with this @Kate

 

[bluemeteor]

Some TLDs will have more of a purpose. For .app, you need to agree that you will use https. Because apps will run on .app. It’s not just about marketing your “app” on .app. TLDs are designed for function, for resource location.

Look at the address bar, there is a https before namepros.com.

 

[Mopho]

So no real game changer.

Hmmm, the reason why Google will not have “conflict of interest” by being the domainate search engine that owns a TLD (.app) that will integrate DNSSEC, HTTPS and other security features is important. What is good for Google is good for the US. Google’s dominance isn’t just a couple of guys from Standford, wake up. Domainers are the grease on the rails. Who profits and who gets run over is a matter of foresight.

 

[DnEbook]

Could anyone apply them? Free?

That's why spamming is so easy ..... want website development ?

 

[bluemeteor]

That's why spamming is so easy ..... want website development ?

lol. getting those every day. wondered how they knew I registered a name the next day.

 

[Lawismything]

Study is useless on the basis that it makes no sense to have brand+app.com when .com was entirely dependent on the brand name.

I own say rewards.app, why would rewardsapp.com be needed when rewards.com is the representation. Most brands or small business would snag the .com for the brand name however now with .app it makes sense to expand to .app and adopt for many more reasons than the main 5 selling points by google.

But by all means Kate keep selling two-three word .coms if they sell like hot cakes for you some people have different routes like me that work a lot better. Heck just this past week sold two names that aren’t even domains but act like one within Instagram for more than 75,000 for a total of two names. It’s about understanding businesses and buyers and presenting an opportunity.

Cheers :$

 

[Jonathan MacDermid]

I'm happy that 50% of my .app purchases are also registered in the .com as "domain"app.com
while the other 50% are registered in the "domain".com format.

Sometimes adding app to the end of a domain name makes it unwieldy and that seems to be the ones where is is only represented in the "domain".com format. Where it is a singular word domain, the domainapp.com is registered.

I think this is possibly a part of the reason for the large registration discrepancy between the two and possibly one that warrants further investigation.