new gtlds Can New gTLD's Boost A Start-ups’ Digital Presence?

[News]

Absolutely. gTLDs can help start-ups in a very effective pay per click (PPC) campaigns on Google as it describes your business more clearly and hence it becomes more likely for visitors to click on your link than any other .com or .in TLD.

Suppose you search for real estate developers in Gurgaon on Google and it shows up parasgroup.com, lotusgreens.com, gurgaondevelopers.realty etc. So gurgaondevelopers.realty will certainly get more clicks because it shows exactly what you were searching for and the business that company is into.

Pre-registering can be a great strategy for start-ups to avoid competition for premium gTLDs which would be intensesoon. It is like booking a movie ticket, the sooner you get to the ticket window the better your chances are to get the seat of your choice...

Read More

 

[sbweb]

On the other hand:

1. Most consumers are still not familiar with these new gTLDs and might avoid them altogether. Thus, works against the author's improved CTR theory.

2. A lot of spammers/scammers are using these new gTLDs. Trust is an issue.

3. Google has already confirmed that the new gTLDs have no effect on the SEO rankings for a site.

 

[asset.domains]

One word com are taken, startups need that amount of money for y1 , so they have to find an alternative , the easiest way is to divide to com and non com.

 

[Kate]

As usual, the guy is an entrepreneur using .com only (and maybe .in).
Why don't those pundits never implement their own advice ?

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

On the other hand:

1. Most consumers are still not familiar with these new gTLDs and might avoid them altogether.

I'd like to some actual research on that alleged phenomena.

Given how willing people are to click on no_url_shorteners links, I think most people don't give a damn.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

As usual, the guy is an entrepreneur using .com only (and maybe .in).
Why don't those pundits never implement their own advice ?

Maybe because they already have .com sites that are established.

 

[JB Lions]

I'd like to some actual research on that alleged phenomena.

Given how willing people are to click on no_url_shorteners links, I think most people don't give a damn.

Good for something, url shorteners.

Actual research, you can simply ask people you know if they've heard of this or that.

You can look at - http://dngeek.com/

go thru all the funded startup threads and see what's being used and not being used. You'll see startups not taking the advice from post 1.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

The research I would like to see is things like carstereo.com vs car.stereo

Yes there is no .stereo tld but that is what I want to see - a researcher who owns both, identical site on both, posts links around web randomly choosing one or the other and see if there is a trend.

My guess is there won't be.

Without an experiment designed to be repeatable to test the hypothesis, you can cherry pick data to match whatever conclusion you want.

And the experiment should have same keywords in both domain names (car and stereo in above example)

 

[JB Lions]

The research I would like to see is things like carstereo.com vs car.stereo

Yes there is no .stereo tld but that is what I want to see - a researcher who owns both, identical site on both, posts links around web randomly choosing one or the other and see if there is a trend.

My guess is there won't be.

Without an experiment designed to be repeatable to test the hypothesis, you can cherry pick data to match whatever conclusion you want.

And the experiment should have same keywords in both domain names (car and stereo in above example)

One looks like a url people are familiar with, the other looks like a run on sentence.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

Do people care what it looks like?
Again - people click on things like bit DOT ly FORWARDSLASH 45sd3aw all the time.

 

[ttfan]

I think you make a fair point. If it's short with meaningful words, people are likely to trust it, whether it a .com, .ccTLD or .ngTLD. It's the long and/or cryptic url I'd always avoid.

 

[redesignunit]

I think you make a fair point. If it's short with meaningful words, people are likely to trust it, whether it a .com, .ccTLD or .ngTLD. It's the long and/or cryptic url I'd always avoid.

yes long domain never accepted for any user because it is very tough to remember.

 

[Kate]

Maybe because they already have .com sites that are established.

Sure, but what are they going to use for their next business venture ? I am sure they don't even believe the stuff they write. It's NIMBY talk.
Domainers are guilty as well, they peddle toxic extensions that they wouldn't use in the real world, for a business. Why do they expect end users to volunteer as guinea pigs ?

Do people care what it looks like?
Again - people click on things like bit DOT ly FORWARDSLASH 45sd3aw all the time.

It's not the kind of URL I would put on a business card. Nor would I advertise it. See the difference ?

 

[enlytend]

As usual, the guy is an entrepreneur using .com only (and maybe .in).
Why don't those pundits never implement their own advice ?

"Do as I say, not as I do..."

The research I would like to see is things like carstereo.com vs car.stereo

Buy a couple of domain pairs like that, set up an Adwords campaign with 2 ads in per ad group, identical except for their display URLs (domain). Ideally, bid on keywords which will show in bold in both domains. Set up an experiment to show each ad 50% of the time. That will give you direct info about their benefit (or lack of) in Adwords and a good indication of whether it would have a positive, negative or neutral effect in search.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

Yes, something like that.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

Sure, but what are they going to use for their next business venture ? I am sure they don't even believe the stuff they write. It's NIMBY talk.
Domainers are guilty as well, they peddle toxic extensions that they wouldn't use in the real world, for a business. Why do they expect end users to volunteer as guinea pigs ?

It's not the kind of URL I would put on a business card. Nor would I advertise it. See the difference ?

Yes I see the difference, but if they are not bothered by bit dot ly links online, why would they be bothered by wolfalice dot band on a business card?

 

[Asfas1000]

Yes I see the difference, but if they are not bothered by bit dot ly links online, why would they be bothered by wolfalice dot band on a business card?

Clicking on a URL (like bit_ly/xxxxxxx) is not the same as remembering the URL....

 

[JB Lions]

Yes I see the difference, but if they are not bothered by bit dot ly links online, why would they be bothered by wolfalice dot band on a business card?

Try what I posted about "go thru all the funded startup threads and see what's being used and not being used. You'll see startups not taking the advice from post 1."

Why do you think so many startups are passing up on these new gtlds?

The latest one, 1 out of 70 - http://dngeek.com/2016/05/70-newly-funded-startups-domain-names-mios-com-spaces-com-perfect-org/

The 2 posts before that one:
5/79
0/76

So last 3 posts 6 out of 225

2.6%

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

Try what I posted about "go thru all the funded startup threads and see what's being used and not being used. You'll see startups not taking the advice from post 1."

Why do you think so many startups are passing up on these new gtlds?

They are passing up on the new gTLDs because .com has momentum and because there is a lot of FUD out there.

The same reason so many people Windows when Linux is clearly a technically superior operating system.

The same reason people pay $3.00 for bottled water they see in a TV commercial that is no different than the $0.79 bottled water one shelf over.

There is a lot of marketing momentum for .com.

That is changing, and soon they will see that users don't really care and search engine ranking (which is what really matters) doesn't care.

 

[JB Lions]

I updated my post as you were posting that:

So last 3 posts, 6 startups out of 225

2.6% of those startups tracked went with a new gtld.

And you just gave a bunch of reasons to go with a .com

As far as PPC, some of the same reasons, people are familiar with it.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

I updated my post as you were posting that:

So last 3 posts 6 out of 225

2.6% of those startups tracked went with a new gtld.

And you just gave a bunch of reasons to go with a .com

No, I gave reasons why the startups are choosing .com.

They think it matters, but to the end user, it really doesn't. They go where the hyperlink tells them to. Getting on the first page of Google is what matters, and Google doesn't give .com an advantage.

 

[JB Lions]

No, I gave reasons why the startups are choosing .com.

They think it matters, but to the end user, it really doesn't. They go where the hyperlink tells them to. Getting on the first page of Google is what matters, and Google doesn't give .com an advantage.

So you know more than all those startups. And the top 500 merchants on the internet who are on .com? Maybe they understand marketing, consumer behavior etc. Yes, you can rank with any extension on Google, most smart businesses think beyond that.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

How many of the top 500 merchants are using sites they were not using before the ngTLD explosion?

 

[JB Lions]

How many of the top 500 merchants are using sites they were not using before the ngTLD explosion?

They could have went with .net, or other extensions available. They didn't. And new startups, 2.6% using that site as a source. Is that impressive?

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

.net at least historically was for network infrastructure, .com was for commerce.

They aren't limited to those purposes, but that was their stated intent at the beginning.