new gtlds Are new gTLDs hurting ".com" investors' business?

[guillon]

As a fan of new gTLDs, I frankly admit that I like to tease ".com" domainers but I often note that it then turns to "hate" so I wonder what is the reason for this. The number one reason why some people hate new gTLDs so much is - to me - that it hurts their business (and I totally understand this) but if this reason is wrong, then, what is it?

 

[trickytobeat]

Here are my new GTLD sales to date

Wire.berlin $8,750 USD, (Mar 3, 2015)
Wizard.berlin $360 USD, (Oct 13, 2015)
613.xyz $1,000 USD, (May 31, 2016)
Whistler.life $250 USD, (Mar 21, 2017)

I own 400 new GTLD's and have invested roughly $3,000 USD to date in new GTLD's

.com is king and I am guessing, always will be, however, given time there should be general acceptance and use of some select new GTLD extensions.

Upon asking a very successful one of the old guard first to the trough circa 1996-1999, original one word .com domain registrants, which of the new GTLD's he thought would be best to invest in, I was told,
.club
.xyz
.group

, for what it's worth.

Hatred? I think the sheer volume of new extensions created in such a short time period and the resultant confusion can be attributed to the expressed frustration and hatred if you will. I think the policies of protecting large swaths of names by the registries and the exorbitant reg and renewal fees for the "premium" names is at the root of the hatred.

It seems to me that the wild west of the .com boom has been put into overdrive with the introduction of the new GTLDs.

One obvious observation that I will offer, for what it's worth is, the domain name business is not for the faint of heart! The domain name game is as ugly a business as there is. Why? Money, short and sweet.

The potential for making huge profits will bring to bear a level of competition where anything goes, and where anything goes, the weak when beaten, hate.

IMHO

Robert McLean

 

[maksimfa]

i think it hurt the; org, net, info, pro, etc - if anything

I think this is a great point.

I do believe that .org has its place, particularly for non-profits, but .net, .info, etc are becoming more irrelevant, and now those three are getting closer in value to everything else.

 

[maksimfa]

I am glad we can use my company name as an example. 2A Media Inc.

In my case, I knew I wanted something along the lines and had an email from name.com about .media tld. Saw 2A.Media was avail and decided to pick it up and see what I waned to do with it. At first it was maybe $20? Not the $80 renewal as a premium 2 char tld.

Earlier this year I needed to form a company to hold my digital assets and looking at alternatives, for which I did own the .coms.... such as Bazinga . king (Bazinga Inc.) and Comtria . king (Comtria Inc.), I decided to go first with 2A.Media. IT was short and memorable, and was not going to be too much of a public site so was fine with it.

Anything other than 2A.Media.... such as JoesCompany.Media.... I would shy away from .media.... BUT .... since It was easy to remember, and a tech/media company, I was okay going with this tld.

For a finance company or anything like that, my target clients would not know the other tlds.

So I guess..... 1 word or 2 or 3 character + new TLD would be preference over a longer .com..... but anything other than that.... give me the .com.

I will try to acquire 2amedia.com..... but the more I use 2a.media.... the more I like it, and will likely TM it as per suggestions here.

The only other non standard tlds I own are my first name in .me and .im, single word .press and .party for $1 each at namecheap, and a number of dropped .pro I picked up recently, again, only because under $2 each.

Oh.... and a few single word, relevant .pics/.photos that I am trying to sell, but about half of them will be dropped.

 

[Recons.Com]

.org hurt itself.

It raised its prices by less than $1 for wholesale, wholesalers added another $2 on top, as a result my GD price even with DDC is almost 50% higher than .com price.

 

[Cal2]

As a fan of new gTLDs, I frankly admit that I like to tease ".com" domainers but I often note that it then turns to "hate" so I wonder what is the reason for this. The number one reason why some people hate new gTLDs so much is - to me - that it hurts their business (and I totally understand this) but if this reason is wrong, then, what is it?

People don't usually like to be 'teased' about something they hold near and dear, or about something they believe to be 'absolute truth'.

Maybe the "hate" is in part because of how the ".com" domainers are looking at things? Eg. Most all of what I have is .com. I just sold one for 15k, that I hand regged a couple years ago. If some fan of new gTLDs hadn't been so much a fan of them and focused so much on them, maybe they would have gotten to the .com before me and then I wouldn't have had the sale?

THANK YOU NEW GTLDS!!

*TEASE*

 

[urlurl]

i'm not a hater of the new extensions, but i don't see them as a great investment either - too much risk vs reward and the new extensions are designed and priced with the enduser (not domainers) in mind.

1. Most of the great names are either reserved by the register or priced so high it doesn't make sense to hold the name for 5 - 10 years waiting for an enduser. The registers want to sell the premium names themselves and collect the premium renewal fee's (very smart on their part)

2. Way too many extensions and alternative choices. The value in a domain name is in its use and the rarity factor. One would have to buy up all the extensions to control and hold a monopoly on a particular name or phrase.

3. It will take many more years until the mass population know and trust the new extensions. waiting with renewals can get very expensive.

4. There is still the possibility some of these new extension will fail... then what?

 

[Lox]

.horse is a joke

Listen or read the ICANN debates and reports prior 2012. The dot horse is related to the Derby horses and Horse protected names. It was clear from the start that dot horse is a very small special niche. Nothing else.

horseracingintfed.com

 

[ProDomains]

.horse is no joke! Just look at this incredibly serious .horse page someone crafted:

http://taylorswift.horse

 

[offthehandle]

.horse is no joke! Just look at this incredibly serious .horse page someone crafted:

http://taylorswift.horse

Both her and the horse are a joke.

Listen or read the ICANN debates and reports prior 2012. The dot horse is related to the Derby horses and Horse protected names. It was clear from the start that dot horse is a very small special niche. Nothing else.

horseracingintfed.com

I didnt look that and I learn something new daily! Thanks!

 

[TRY]

It is technically impossible for Most new gtlds to be a one word domain name since .com now has no meaning to the general public except that it is a reference to a website.

You say you like to tease .com owners but on most of these threads new gtld proponents/investors seem to be the ones in the end asking for people to stop making Comparisons.

I can understand people looking for an opportunity, "make money online" is one of the most searched for phrases. So many offer advice but in the end They are getting richer and You are getting poorer.

There are many differences between a .com and a new gtld, they are not the same.
Ownership/Contractual rights are much stronger in .com.
In .com Pricing caps are in place to protect the registrants.
No one country controls .com, yet 1 person can control a new gtld.

P.S I'm not against new gtlds, just think they need to pivot and quickly....and not as an alternative to .com cause cctlds, net, org,...So where do you fit in? Not as an alternative but as a supplement.

 

[offthehandle]

So where do you fit in? Not as an alternative but as a supplement.

Sort of like those snakeoil nutritional lose-weight fast supplements that come on at late night infomercials. lol.

 

[BrandSac]

in short run in launching a new company or startup by inexperienced persons yes, in long run no way not in 100 years.

 

[doubleU]

The launch of new gTLD's as greatly affected the domain aftermarket, with more than 20 years of maturity the aftermarket as experienced something akin to a reset.

Not since the 90's have I ever witnessed such a 'Fickle' aftermarket, in fact the level of uncertainty revolving around new gTLD's as lead to even the most experienced domainers confused about future investments.

 

[NameShiba]

The new extensions work as an investment to only the top 1% of keywords available. Everything else is a hard sale at this point of time not only in the industry, but as a whole.

It will never be "the new .COM"

 

[Otdowns]

Are new gTLDs hurting ".COM" investors' business?

To some extent, the answer is undeniable yes, the question is to what extent.

New gTLDs have opened up more options to end-users that prior would have been forced into buying the .COM, .ORG or .NET. Now sales data clearly tells us that .COM is and will continue to be the most desired extention for end-users, however, there is always going to be that X% of end users that are happy to launch on a gTLD, meaning there is that X% of .COM investors that lose out on a sale initially. Now, people will argue this only makes the .COM worth more, however, that is only true if the company desires the .COM, there will be many companies that are happy to keep their gTLD and invest money elsewhere and that .COM holder will miss out on sale they would have had if gTLDS were non-existent.

Although data shows that gTLD effects on .COM are very minor, more extension options do mean that a small percentage of .COM holders will lose out on sales, that is undeniable.

People, you and i should not care whether it is .COM or a gTLD, at the end of the day we should care about ROI and whether you accept it or not there is opportunity in all extentions, admittedly not equal opportunity but oppourtunity none the less.

 

[jmcc]

No.

Regards...jmcc

 

[kriss05]

Yes.

 

[xn--v4h.com]

That's like saying Madison Ave is complaining Brooklyn is hurting their business. I own dot coms and beyond including emojis. I see this as not an either or but whatever you like depending on what you want to do.

 

[atinc]

That's like saying Madison Ave is complaining Brooklyn is hurting their business. I own dot coms and beyond including emojis. I see this as not an either or but whatever you like depending on what you want to do.

Great example, it is good to remember that Brooklyn is wider than Madison Ave. and lately prices are went much more in % comparing to Madison Av.

Great example

 

[garptrader]

I believe new TLDs are hurting average .COM domains because the largest consumers of domain names are domain investors. So when domain investors have a thousand TLD options instead of a dozen, what do they end up doing - buying the latest TLD release rather than buying aftermarket .COM auctions from other investors. But realistically end user demand for domains has not changed much. Of course there are many low-budget buyers who have new options. They might have considered a .Net previously for low $XXX while now they go for a new TLD for $XX. Are they going to pay $XXXX plus premium renewals for a new TLD when they wouldn't pay that for a .COM? NOPE.

 

[Fancy.domains]

I have sold 96 (might have missed a few ones) new gTLDs until today.

2017 has been slower for me but I am kind of confident. I am also investing about the same amounts in .com.

However, I think domaining is hurt in a way. All these extensions are causing inflation. For the big players in .com, I think it will not change. M. Mann is selling names like never before as far as I have seen. Just an example.

 

[Kate]

New gTLDs have opened up more options to end-users that prior would have been forced into buying the .COM, .ORG or .NET.

But end users already had plenty of options before, like alt TLDs such as .biz or ccTLDs - repurposed or not. .io or .ws suck but they are no worse than many of the nTLDs we are seeing today.
And it's not so easy to buy good keywords in nTLDs, as many were either reserved by the registries or scooped up by speculators. The end user is often back to square one, having to pay a premium for a 'good' domain. It's no wonder the registries are the power sellers in this business.

Now sales data clearly tells us that .COM is and will continue to be the most desired extention for end-users, however, there is always going to be that X% of end users that are happy to launch on a gTLD, meaning there is that X% of .COM investors that lose out on a sale initially.

I don't think .com owners are losing out. If somebody wants to buy a domain for regfee and goes for a nTLD or some available domain of lower quality, it's not business lost to domainers anyway. They had no intention of buying on the aftermarket. Remember, they always have alternatives.
.com owners could lose a sale when there is a huge gap between their asking price and the alternatives available on the market. It could mean the pricing is out of touch with reality, or that it's not the right end user for the domain.
End users ultimately decide what is the best deal for them.

Now do you think that: new gTLDs are hurting new gTLDs investors' business ? I would say they are

 

[offthehandle]

I would like to encourage all new gtld owners to drop their dot coms, please dont renew them because the new extensions are certainly 100% the new future. XYZ and Whateveregistry will love you in fact for annually supporting their overhead and snakeoil sales campaigns and keeping these .horse's in their stables.

 

[New.Life]

I would like to encourage all new gtld owners to drop their dot coms, please dont renew them because the new extensions are certainly 100% the new future. XYZ and Whateveregistry will love you in fact for annually supporting their overhead and snakeoil sales campaigns and keeping these .horse's in their stables.

Yes, I dropped almost all of my .COMs, and I'm not going to register anything again.
Safe money! Be Happy!

 

[New.Life]

.Life .World .City .Club .Money - our future!

The last of my registered domains - Future.World