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.

 

[MadAboutDomains]

They have app search already on Google. When you're on a phone, it searches for apps. It works pretty well.

 

[-EM-]

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

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.

Well said.

 

[smartwebby]

I am not sure how .WEB would be different from an .COM. .COMs are already synonymous ( and king) with internet. .APP on the other hand is distinct. It is a homepage only for Apps. There are thousands of APPs which do not have a homepage and and, are present in the App marketplace. .APP gives them an homepage, an identity on the internet.

Well yes agreed! I too don't like .WEB much to think of it.... initially when I thought google won it I thought it would make an impact with personal web pages of some kind (has to have a unique proposition like .APP).

Totally agree on the .APP usage... its going to be adopted quickly is my take too! From development perspective I find it very attractive as I can have specific websites for my apps even if I don't own the .COM... which doesn't really matter coz the APPs would be shown to be made by my existing .COM brand. Reverse view, I don't think the .COM owners of known apps however need to purchase the .APP unless they are generic words that they are paranoid about losing traffic to a new player with a better app possibly.

 

[smartwebby]

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.

Premium, unavailable or running out fast!

Additionally... Premium renewals is bad news! But I guess it makes sense for the registry coz they will have to wait a few years till the extension is adopted universally. Like Rick said, End users will not mind the premium renewals, its the domain investors that will.