.co .CO - The Discussion, Showcase and Sales Report Thread

[TOXX]

Well, it seems like Colombia will be releasing .CO to the internet market:
...
http://www.mincomunicaciones.gov.co...ge=./mods/contenido/noticia_user_view&id=1043
...
This could truly be a big competitor to .COM (especially being a "typo").
I would say with proper guidance .CO could REALLY have a bright future!
...
Let me know your thoughts please.

 

[Keith]

I can think of far more interesting things I'd like to see... like how many of them were bid on by new accounts, etc.

New accounts have nothing to do with it. The real issue is if the sale completes. A buyer that pays is a good buyer, new or old.

 

[DU]

New accounts have nothing to do with it. The real issue is if the sale completes. A buyer that pays is a good buyer, new or old.

This matters to me when looking at the "unpaid" numbers You were interested in those - not the sale complete numbers - you changed what you were looking at

No one shill bids on an old established account.

No one will remedy a bad decision to sell on a no-reserve auction on an established account.

This would afford me some insight into the reality of the modern online auctions.

It's why you must always BUDGET first.

Curious -
Did Jelly.co ever get funded in the end?

I see Church.co did which was good sell

 

[Keith]

Curious -
Did Jelly.co ever get funded in the end?

Yes it did. It is currently in the middle of transfer

 

[DU]

Yes it did. It is currently in the middle of transfer

You should give some commission to Shane based on his bump (according to his blog).

A quite remarkable sale relative to others imho.

J.

 

[Keith]

You should give some commission to Shane based on his bump (according to his blog).

A quite remarkable sale relative to others imho.

J.

I'd never seen that blog until just now. Funny it was picked as one of his favorite 2.

Even more remarkable than the sale is the fact that both church and jelly were essentially dropped. The owners were going to let them expire so I made a small offer to buy. It worked out this time :sold:

 

[dragtastic]

I'd never seen that blog until just now. Funny it was picked as one of his favorite 2.

Even more remarkable than the sale is the fact that both church and jelly were essentially dropped. The owners were going to let them expire so I made a small offer to buy. It worked out this time :sold:

That's a pretty good ROI - congrats

 

[FUTRS]

my new dot co name has finally hit my account

you can count SNEAKER.co as paid, transferred and complete.


i thought this was a bargain and a sleeper at the price i paid ($110)

thoughts?

.. thanks

 

[emjohn]

Congrats. You're one of the ones who benefitted from a very diluted auction. In an auction with 50 names, that name would have sold for a lot more. There are a few people who got some nice $100 deals.

my new dot co name has finally hit my account

you can count SNEAKER.co as paid, transferred and complete.


i thought this was a bargain and a sleeper at the price i paid ($110)

thoughts?

.. thanks

 

[MicroGuy]

In an auction with 50 names, that name would have sold for a lot more.

No. The domain has very little value on .CO. The common usage is sneakers with an "S" not "sneaker". IMO.

 

[FUTRS]

@EmJohn -Thanks

@MicroGuy
... there is no denying that 'SneakerS' (plural) would be the better term - for a dot com or a dot net..etc.. - but i do disagree with the idea that this name fails the dot CO (Company) extension - i think think that the singular, 'Sneaker' is much more fitting for a a CO than arguably any other extension.


Which makes more sense:

SneakerS Company
or
Sneaker Company



this seems to be another great debate within this extension:
is the singular better than the more popular plural (in most cases) because the singular makes more sense paired up with 'Company'

I have a few one word dot co's and all are plural... i tend to think they miss the mark ever so slightly because of that... Tripods.co, Baseballs.co, Organizers.co... etc...

haha.. trust me, i would rather be wrong about that theory for the sake of these names... but i will leave it up to you all to debate that.

Thanks
nJoy all

 

[MeanMrMustard]

Got mine from the auction...in Sedo account at least.

bacon.co
abode.co
spinach.co
ketchup.co

 

[MicroGuy]

Which makes more sense:

SneakerS Company
or
Sneaker Company

I did not realize that .CO stood for company. This is new information that I will need to digest.

Thank you for the clarification. IMO.

 

[MeanMrMustard]

I did not realize that .CO stood for company. This is new information that I will need to digest.

Thank you for the clarification. IMO.

Just the right amount of snark to not get a warning no doubt.

 

[DU]

Just the right amount of snark to not get a warning no doubt.

I don't think it deserves a warning as it's a perfectly legitimate point (whether one agrees or not).

I'm in the school that .CO doesn't mean company but means one letter short of a .COM in the same way that it means one can short of a six pack. Company is not worldwide (neither is sneaker (US Term) for that matter but it's still a big market). People can't just throw out there that it means COMPANY and not expect someone to say that's not the case... the reality is that the not-the-case camp are more right!

People make the mistake imho of seeing what they want to see and not what is there.

Sneaker.CO is sneaker dot CO or sneaker dot cee oh. It is not ever, and never will be, sneaker company.

The only sneaker companies are sneakercompany.com or sneakercompany.tv or sneaker.biz or even (yes, I'm serious) sneakercompany.co and every other TLD. Sneaker has value as a short keyword but not sneaker company imho

The .co is an extension. Nothing more. Sure it might not mean Colombia anymore - but in my mind it means NOTHING. It has no special or inherent meaning.

That said? I'm sure with some effort sneaker.co will get a decent return. Just because I don't view things the same way doesn't mean others don't - and just as importantly doesn't mean that it automatically makes it bad.

 

[the_poet]

Guys, .co has the same meaning in .co.uk, .co.nz, etc. It's intended for commercial use (most .co.uk's are COmpany sites), but it's also used for other sites of different nature: personal websites, blogs, forums, etc. So, as for plural and singular versions of a keyword, the more valuable is determined case by case, it's not just the singular because it fits the company meaning: Sneakers.co is better than Sneaker.co and Fruit.co is better than Fruits.co

 

[Domainstore]

Hello :

One of the great advantages of theCO-extension is the following .
You can for instance register : TRAVELTO.CO
And then you can add the following =
travelto.co/UK
travelto.co/US
travelto.co/Fr
etc
So : You add the extension of the country after the .co, and after a slash. And if you know the extension of any country, you can understand what country it's about.=
:bingo:
:wave:

 

[emjohn]

So do we have a fact here now or an opinion? It appears you concede that it is opinion.

"They have a great sneaker company" Correct
"They have a great sneakers company" Acceptable but not really common place.

I agree that sneakers.co is worth more than sneaker.co but sneaker.co is STILL a tremendous deal at $110. This was the point of my original comment. In an auction with a lot fewer domains, this would have gone much higher.

No. The domain has very little value on .CO. The common usage is sneakers with an "S" not "sneaker". IMO.

---------- Post added at 03:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:25 AM ----------

Recognizable?

CO has been the abbreviation for "company" for at least 400 years. Most business people around the world know what CO stands for. This is because English is the second language in a lot of countries and English colonizers came under the auspices of many "COmpanies".

If you have your own subjective viewpoint of CO, hey, great, but just know you don't share the same view with a heck of a lot of other people.

Nobody said .co MUST stand for "company", but it is one of the most recognizable abbreviations around. And that is irrefutable.

I don't think it deserves a warning as it's a perfectly legitimate point (whether one agrees or not).

I'm in the school that .CO doesn't mean company but means one letter short of a .COM in the same way that it means one can short of a six pack. Company is not worldwide (neither is sneaker (US Term) for that matter but it's still a big market). People can't just throw out there that it means COMPANY and not expect someone to say that's not the case... the reality is that the not-the-case camp are more right!

People make the mistake imho of seeing what they want to see and not what is there.

Sneaker.CO is sneaker dot CO or sneaker dot cee oh. It is not ever, and never will be, sneaker company.

The only sneaker companies are sneakercompany.com or sneakercompany.tv or sneaker.biz or even (yes, I'm serious) sneakercompany.co and every other TLD. Sneaker has value as a short keyword but not sneaker company imho

The .co is an extension. Nothing more. Sure it might not mean Colombia anymore - but in my mind it means NOTHING. It has no special or inherent meaning.

That said? I'm sure with some effort sneaker.co will get a decent return. Just because I don't view things the same way doesn't mean others don't - and just as importantly doesn't mean that it automatically makes it bad.

 

[DU]

Recognizable?

CO has been the abbreviation for "company" for at least 400 years. Most business people around the world know what CO stands for. This is because English is the second language in a lot of countries and English colonizers came under the auspices of many "COmpanies".

Nowhere did I say that CO didn't mean Company in a lot of places (even though it's not a global designation).

I said that I'm in the school of people that don't think .CO (see the dot?) means company.

Take Sneaker.COM what does this mean in your world? Sneaker Commerce? Sneaker COMpany? or Sneaker dot com?

Why is .CO different?

More people than you think/realize do not associate the .CO with anything. It's JUST an extension. What's .NET to an end user? No one goes flowershop.net - must be a network of flowershops.

.ORG has that "charity" aura but as domainers and people dilute that notation it is lessening.

.CO gives you NOTHING but a new extension. It's not like .ME or .TV or .XXX which actually have a tangible separation. (Even then MEET.ME is Meet DOT Me and not Meet Me). .CO is just there like CO.UK, CO.JP, CO.IN, COM.CO even.

Ask people what the CO in Sneaker.CO stands for? People will say Company.

Ask people what extension means company? People will say .COM (or Co.Uk, .COM.CO)

Just because someone wants something bad enough doesn't mean they will get it. It is true - and I'm not denying it - that some people/companies are building on sites that are .CO but I would think the vast majority wouldn't say that their name is LEFT OF THE DOT COMPANY. They would say LEFT OF THE DOT DOT CO... and if pressed for their registered name it would be LEFT OF DOT or (most likely - something totally different using a brand that was separate from their company name - such as Sneaker.CO would not be owned by "The Sneaker Company")

Sorry if you still don't get where I'm coming from. This doesn't change the underlying .CO asset - but just how you recognize/describe it.

.COmpany? That's COINTERNET marketing. It's not reality, imho.

If you have your own subjective viewpoint of CO, hey, great, but just know you don't share the same view with a heck of a lot of other people.

Nobody said .co MUST stand for "company", but it is one of the most recognizable abbreviations around. And that is irrefutable.

I would say though, that you are in the minority group of people in the world that instantly associates Company with .CO.

First notice the DOT and then notice the order.. not denying that people can take .CO to mean Company... but people assume it works the other way which is recognizing Company as .CO - this will NEVER happen. EVER EVER. Probably.

.CO <> Company
CO = Company (in some jurisdictions)

---------- Post added at 08:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:21 AM ----------

"They have a great sneaker company" Correct
"They have a great sneakers company" Acceptable but not really common place.

This has no relevance imho.
Sneaker.CO is a brand.
Sneakers.CO is a brand.

Sneakers.CO makes more sense (you don't ever do anything with one sneaker though I found a one shoe store online recently).

It's potentially a very good brand. Potentially worth a lot more than $110.

I hope John sells it for $1,000,000
I hope he gets a more realistic X,XXX.

The whole Company discussion is just totally irrelevant. No one ever sells a name and has to explain the extension.

 

[NovyTimm]

The .co is an extension. Nothing more. Sure it might not mean Colombia anymore - but in my mind it means NOTHING. It has no special or inherent meaning.

.CO is the second-level company domain for 45 countries. So it definitely means "company" in at least 45 countries.

This is probably why .CO seems to be more popular for international companies than U.S. companies, which are used to .COM.

 

[emjohn]

I think down to the very core of your arguments, there is a lot of subjectivity.

"Sneakers.com" could be a generic product site with the most well known extension around. In terms of the mass market, most people have no clue com stands for commercial, nor do they care. They know that ".com" is something that must be typed in order to access a site on the WWW. But that's about it.

I bet there are more people in the world that know CO stands for "Company" than those who know COM stands for "commercial". When it comes down to it though, it all doesn't matter because business success will be achieved by the popularity, accessibility and quality of the extension. .com and .co satisfy both of these criteria given market history.

The rest would just be hairsplitting for the sake of argument, that's all.

I'm more interested in the bottom line.

Nowhere did I say that CO didn't mean Company in a lot of places (even though it's not a global designation).

I said that I'm in the school of people that don't think .CO (see the dot?) means company.

Take Sneaker.COM what does this mean in your world? Sneaker Commerce? Sneaker COMpany? or Sneaker dot com?

Why is .CO different?

More people than you think/realize do not associate the .CO with anything. It's JUST an extension. What's .NET to an end user? No one goes flowershop.net - must be a network of flowershops.

.ORG has that "charity" aura but as domainers and people dilute that notation it is lessening.

.CO gives you NOTHING but a new extension. It's not like .ME or .TV or .XXX which actually have a tangible separation. (Even then MEET.ME is Meet DOT Me and not Meet Me). .CO is just there like CO.UK, CO.JP, CO.IN, COM.CO even.

Ask people what the CO in Sneaker.CO stands for? People will say Company.

Ask people what extension means company? People will say .COM (or Co.Uk, .COM.CO)

Just because someone wants something bad enough doesn't mean they will get it. It is true - and I'm not denying it - that some people/companies are building on sites that are .CO but I would think the vast majority wouldn't say that their name is LEFT OF THE DOT COMPANY. They would say LEFT OF THE DOT DOT CO... and if pressed for their registered name it would be LEFT OF DOT or (most likely - something totally different using a brand that was separate from their company name - such as Sneaker.CO would not be owned by "The Sneaker Company")

Sorry if you still don't get where I'm coming from. This doesn't change the underlying .CO asset - but just how you recognize/describe it.

.COmpany? That's COINTERNET marketing. It's not reality, imho.



I would say though, that you are in the minority group of people in the world that instantly associates Company with .CO.

First notice the DOT and then notice the order.. not denying that people can take .CO to mean Company... but people assume it works the other way which is recognizing Company as .CO - this will NEVER happen. EVER EVER. Probably.

.CO <> Company
CO = Company (in some jurisdictions)