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

 

[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.

 

[JB Lions]

Actually commercial. Yet, another reason to use it. You gave some great arguments for .com. Looks like most startups get it as well. So much so, that many will go with some made up .com, even some ridiculous sounding ones, then venture into new gtlds.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

At the end of the 90s, Apple's market share was really low, around 5%.

Business was done with Windows, that's just the way it was.

It was the 'Think Different' campaign that first turned Apple around.

And that is why the new gTLDs will succeed. They are different and fresh, different and fresh attracts attention. Different and fresh isn't boring.

 

[JB Lions]

Virgin cola was new, cola drinkers still went with Coke. AllTheWeb, Teoma etc was new, actually better than Google, people still stuck with Google. Those examples and yours has nothing to do with domains. Again, go thru those lists, actually look what's being used. Real stuff that's actually relevant to what's being discussed.

Do you think this is a good sign - https://ntldstats.com/country

Over half China, only 2 countries in the world with over 1 million regs. That's all of those new gtlds together.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

What's being used are domain names.

A domain name serves two purposes - it allows the lookup of an IP address and it established identity for x509 certificates.

Whether it is .com or .video makes no difference to either of those purposes.

One is boring, one is noticed because it is different.

 

[JB Lions]

What's being used are domain names.

A domain name serves two purposes - it allows the lookup of an IP address and it established identity for x509 certificates.

Whether it is .com or .video makes no difference to either of those purposes.

One is boring, one is noticed because it is different.

It's a struggle isn't it to find good reasons, after you gave a bunch of good ones for .com. I've seen you post from a technical perspective before which is pretty useless here. You think technical or search engine only (small). You don't think business. It's different is not a good reason, things are supposed to be better to move forward.

 

[Asfas1000]

One is boring, one is noticed because it is different.

Don't you think .video is too restrictive for a company ? What if they want to expand ?

 

[tech_noir]

An article I agree with (altrogh not personally tested) New gTLDs Gain Momentum in the Search Environment

Of course it is good to have an established one keyword 15 years old .com, but this topic is for startups and such .com even if available y chance ca consume a significant part of the budget. Starting now... OK, Google in theory might not make a difference, but I still think that keyword.keyord is better than keywordkeyword.com and even keyword.com.

 

[JB Lions]

An article from somebody selling new gtlds.

Again:

Looks like most startups get it as well. So much so, that many will go with some made up .com, even some ridiculous sounding ones, then venture into new gtlds.

This thread is about startups. Tell me why it's 2.6%.

Take the time and go thru each blog post, go deeper than the 3 posts I went thru. Do actual research, post some actual numbers.

 

[JB Lions]

I went thru 3 more, the most recent ones from the other 3 I went thru:

0/87 - http://dngeek.com/2016/05/87-newly-...ir-domain-names-kahua-com-bitso-com-wedo-com/

0/67 - http://dngeek.com/2016/04/67-newly-...gnalsense-com-nativeads-com-translatenow-com/

0/74 - http://dngeek.com/2016/04/74-newly-...n-names-vacasa-com-habito-com-talentpool-com/

0 for 228

Does that look like startups are using these in great numbers? Or does it look like more what I posted above.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

It's a struggle isn't it to find good reasons, after you gave a bunch of good ones for .com. I've seen you post from a technical perspective before which is pretty useless here. You think technical or search engine only (small). You don't think business. It's different is not a good reason, things are supposed to be better to move forward.

No, it's not a struggle.

It's obvious. You own .com domains you want to sell. Thus you have to justify why your high prices are better than the less expensive new gTLDs that you can't hoard because the renewal fee is higher while the potential market is smaller, limited to the scope of the TLD.

Sorry your portfolio is going to crumble in value, that's what happens when you invest in something that is just bits in a database somewhere.

 

[Kate]

And that is why the new gTLDs will succeed. They are different and fresh, different and fresh attracts attention. Different and fresh isn't boring.

Obviously the definition of success varies a lot from one person to another.
For example .cars Registry COO Mike Ambrose said that .CARS .CAR .AUTO (3 extensions combined) surpassed his expectations, reaching over one thousand registrations after a few months.

If new extensions are so good, why don't end users embrace them on a large scale ? What's the hold-up ? They can have them now from their favorite registrars.

I think there is one huge problem that is underestimated: there isn't critical mass in new extensions. Consumers don't pay attention and mindshare is nil.
.com and ccTLDs have momentum, they have volume and they are ingrained in the minds of consumers. I would take decades for new extensions to catch up, if they were performing better. But they are lagging. So the gap is widening. End result: new extensions remain marginal oddities.

Back in the day, .mobi was getting traction from prominent end users, it was advertised and it died nonetheless because the momentum could not be sustained. Yet it got exposure that no other new TLD ever got (not even .co). What do people expect ?

3 years on, we have hundreds of new strings, millions of new domains added to the root (boosted by zone stuffing, cheapies and freebies). We have some volume but it's not critical mass, it's dilution.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

End users are embracing them. They are new, and it generally is not a good idea to change an established domain name very often.

 

[JB Lions]

0 for the last 228. That's what goes for embracing around here I guess.

 

[Alice Wonder Miscreations]

0 for the last 228. That's what goes for embracing around here I guess.

it's easy to cherry pick data - hence why I suggested a proper experiment.

You say "0 for 228" right after another user posted that auto related registrations on the ngTLDs exceeded expectation.

 

[JB Lions]

it's easy to cherry pick data - hence why I suggested a proper experiment.

You say "0 for 228" right after another user posted that auto related registrations on the ngTLDs exceeded expectation.

Tell me you're joking. What do you expect somebody to say in situations like that. That it was below expectations? Because we have a thread on that somewhere here. Where some talked about expectations before they were released, and how the numbers didn't quite meet them.