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.

 

[Kate]

Update:
I ran another compare (still using yesterday's files).
Out of 198097 .app domains, 6392 (3.23%) have their exact matches unregistered in .com (*).
By exact match, I mean the left of the dot, this time not including the string 'app'

For example emergingtechjobs.app is registered but emergingtechjobs.com is available.

(*) However this figure is inflated, because some names registered in .app are not available in .com such as single letters or digits, and also some registered .com domains have no name servers and are therefore missing in the zone files. Domains that are on hold (suspended) are also missing in the zone files.

PS: I have observed a good chunk of Dutch domains in the diff, so they might still be registered in .nl.

 

[smartwebby]

Interesting study Kate!

Google is just getting a piece of the "domaining" pie that so many registries are cashing in on (Smart move I feel). I don't think they will use it in either of the scenarios mentioned. However .APP does sound better than much of the junk out there but heavily depends on usage by app developers (who would obviously go for the .COM - if they don't already have it - as soon as they generate enough money). Everyone investing in NGTLDs know that they are gambling unless they have actual development plans. Defensive registrations/purchases by paranoid end users is the only way these gambles can pay off right now imho.

Doesn't Google own the .WEB extension too?... waiting to see what they do with it!!

 

[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.

 

[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 :$

 

[Joe N]

IMO Google should plan to give results based on .app extension. Eg, if keyword 'Live Soccer' is being searched, livesoccer.app should appear first, followed by other apps closely matching the keyword. This is a structured way results should throw up. .app should be the way an app is identified. Similarly, there are lakhs of apps which are tough to find as they have similarly named apps. This is a big opportunity for Google to systemize it.

Kind of sounds like going back to the days of giving too much strength to EMDs. Want to rank for an app about Honey Roasted Barbecue Peanuts? All you have to do is register HoneyRoastedBarbecuePeanuts.app and you'll rank #1. Kind of a step backwards for Google...

The way .app sites would be ranked would be the same as any other site: based on quality content and backlinks. And in that case, it doesn't matter if you own a .app, .com, .net, or .beer... if you have the best site authority, you rank #1. And so the best and most efficient way to find an app you want to download is still... wait for it... the App Store!

 

[Recons.Com]

Facts:

1. Most apps don't use word app as part of their domain. It is instagram.com not instagramapp.com or instagram.app

2. Having app name plus word app basically means I could not afford proper .com or could not come up with proper branding

 

[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.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

Update:
I ran another compare (still using yesterday's files).
Out of 198097 .app domains, 6392 (3.23%) have their exact matches unregistered in .com (*).
By exact match, I mean the left of the dot, this time not including the string 'app'

For example emergingtechjobs.app is registered but emergingtechjobs.com is available.

(*) However this figure is inflated, because some names registered in .app are not available in .com such as single letters or digits, and also some registered .com domains have no name servers and are therefore missing in the zone files. Domains that are on hold (suspended) are also missing in the zone files.

PS: I have observed a good chunk of Dutch domains in the diff, so they might still be registered in .nl.

I'm glad that you did this, because the initial comparison blah.app to blahapp.com isn't worth measuring imho.

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

Just cause a lot of idiots registered things that weren't even worth registering even in the .COM, out of excitement, doesn't indicate that the gTLD .APP itself isn't inherently practical for any purpose. It may be that in most cases, perhaps, that .APP is useless as an investment as you stated in your original post, but doesn't render .APP inherently useless.

Like with investments - previous performance isn't an indication of future performance. It's a new extension in a mire of crap(p) extensions, that's for sure, however analysis of the initial numbers of .APP or other gTLDs doesn't really mean that .APP will or won't catch on as a useful extension, or even be a widely recognised extension for websites/app feature pages/web apps over time. Unfortunately there is no way to predict this using the numbers derived from the zone files - but it's the best we've got at this point though I suppose.

Sorry, but that makes no sense to me, I don't see the problem that we are trying to solve here, or how .app would help.
What I see clumsy attempts to justify the existence of a TLD.

I agree that there isn't a problem that this gTLD is trying to solve, but imho nor should it and nor does it claim to or have to, it's just another domain name extension for people to use. Others may be claiming things but it's likely to be fantasy at this point... but again fantasists also don't render the extension useless.

Nothing really renders the .APP gTLD useless unless it becomes highly restrictive or if it gets shuts down.......

 

[Kate]

@Kate Can you report how many "...app.com" domain names are in the .com zone file? It would be interesting to find out the ratio "...app.com" to "....app" and maybe compare it to other ...tld.com/....tld of tlds with natural growth (mostly donuts owned).

178875 domains found. I attached a file.

 

[vkwebdev]

I was inspired by this thread to make some research. Thanks @Kate

I checked all .app registered domain names to see how many of them have free .com alternatives

For Keyword.app domain name

160 733 KeywordApp.com domains are available to register
view full list in Google Sheets

5 364 Keyword.com domains are available to register
view full list in Google Sheets

5 258 Keyword and KeywordApp.com domains are available to register
view full list in Google Sheets

 

[Recons.Com]

Instagram is primarily an app. Many features are not available on desktop.

Many apps also have Web functionality, but they still are known as an app.

Regarding short, most short and nice are already unavailable in .app, including dictionary meaningful, 2l, 3l and on top have premium pricing.

 

[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.

 

[Vimal Kumar]

@Kate. Here are my thoughts where we are headed...
.
App is a standalone offering. Much like Videos, Maps, Images, News, etc which, has its own search option on Google.com. Currently, the official way to search for Apps is to go into Google Play ( on Phone or desktop) and type the keyword. The results are mostly randomly generated ( many times I see it is auto sorted by highest downloads). There is no structured way the results appear. There is no sorting option. Several apps have the exact same names. Eg: You will find several apps titled 'speed test'.

IMO Google is planning to alter this and give a defined structure to App search results. Frankly, it is long ovedue. Having a .app is the easiest way to resolve this and create a structure.

With security (https) and a structure in place, Apps will be much more safer to use and easy to find.

 

[Kate]

Sorry, but that makes no sense to me, I don't see the problem that we are trying to solve here, or how .app would help.
What I see clumsy attempts to justify the existence of a TLD.

 

[Joe N]

No need to be fictional. Instagram is a platform where brands and users make use of the most used social app by teenagers.

A little research by you would back my claims up.

Would love to look into it some more if you could give us the facts of the sale... We could all benefit from that kind of expertise and experience. Which accounts did you sell? Who owned them previously? What steps did you take to sell them? Who purchased them?

I think .app is likely to be another in a long line of disappointing gTLDs, but sales of actual accounts within social media apps is something that has always interested me. Enlighten us.

 

[Dave]

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.

No, it isn't a 'game changer'. Do not mislead others with such trope please.

 

[Joe N]

@Joe Nichols I am unsure what do you mean by "...finding apps very easily on Play Store..". If you open Play Store and search for 'Live Soccer', you will find atleast 30 apps titled exactly 'Live Soccer'. How do you know which one needs to be downloaded? If a friend had recommended you to download 'Live Soccer' app, which one will you download of the 30+ apps?

The one with the best rating.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

IMO Google should plan to give results based on .app extension. Eg, if keyword 'Live Soccer' is being searched, livesoccer.app should appear first, followed by other apps closely matching the keyword. This is a structured way results should throw up. .app should be the way an app is identified. Similarly, there are lakhs of apps which are tough to find as they have similarly named apps. This is a big opportunity for Google to systemize it.

It wouldn't be very useful, because livesoccer.app is probably owned right now by a domain hoarder.

Update: YUP! lol

 

[MadAboutDomains]

lol. What we are discussion is the opportunity Google has to streamline its app. If the keyword domain is not acquired/ developed, then the next closest match results would throw up. Will Google do this? I dont know. Can Google do this? yes it can. There is an issue and there is a likely solution

I reckon they'd struggle, because they own .APP and they've been in trouble before for favouring their own services and search results over others. They can however attempt to influence people to start using .APP domains.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

If a keyword like app is used they could introduce a app section which could help a lot. Doesn’t need to be the search result

A section displaying apps that use .APP names? If you search on Google for "live soccer apps", it recognises that already and displays results from the play store. Where does .APP come into it I'm a bit confused?

 

[Dave]

Oh what the heck. Maybe I'll go reg a few long-tail .app names just for the heck of it.

No no, don't do that.

The reason they had such value back in the day was because of SEO. If you had a domain with the exact keywords people were searching for, it was guaranteed top 3 spot on Google even with the most minimal website. Heavy weighting factor. So if somebody searched for "over 50s life insurance" and you owned Over50sLifeInsurance.com, could throw up a lead gen one page site with a form.

Of course Google clamped down on that around 2010 or so (can't quite remember the year).

Thanks