new gtlds Do new TLDs suffer from an awareness problem or demand problem?

[Arpit131]

Are domain registrants unaware of new top level domain names? I don’t think so.

New top level domain name companies have been saying that new domain options suffer from an awareness problem. Very few people know about them, they say, and this is why they aren’t selling as briskly as hoped.

But I’ve recently started to consider another version of events: domain registrants are aware of new TLDs, and it’s actually a demand issue.

The general population isn’t aware of new domain options, but people who register domain names certainly are.

A few years ago these search results would have been filled with spun .com domain names. Now they are all .com alternatives.

It’s clear that people who are registering domain names are presented with options for non-.com domain names. They just aren’t registering many of them.

You can argue that greater awareness in the general internet population will make domain registrants more comfortable registering new TLDs.


Source

 

[domainer021]

Who says there is a problem? Donuts and Radix are both profitable!

 

[ecalc]

Thanks d021 that's interesting if based on independently audited GAAP compliant financial statements.

 

[Wesley S]

endusers are going to get their names out anyway, thru advertisement. Even though .com is king, it doesn't mean the enduser cant get their name out and be bigger than a .com.

All we need is a large conglomerate to use a small unknown gtld and wham-o you have the broken ice.

 

[Lite]

it’s actually a demand issue.
Source

Agreed.

 

[mad409]

I think it's more awareness at this stage of the game..

 

[garptrader]

Godaddy has shifted much of its marketing toward new TLDs and premium .COM listings have suffered.

Type in "Surfng" into the search for domain bar and I see the following all with $XXX+ prices and many with premium renewals as well...

Surfing.review
Surfing.club
Surfing.website
Surfing.space
Surfing.tech
Surf.website
Surfing.school
Surfing.video
etc.
Only one .COM option is listed Surfingman.com which is likely a premium listing

Go to Godaddy Auctions with the same "surfing" query and you get a different list...
Surfing.network
Surfing.photo
Surfing.fashion
Surfing.global
Surfing.tv

The issue is lack of demand for premium aftermarket domains (regardless of extension). Yes there are exceptions, but generally speaking, end users are not willing to pay premium prices for a domain name. They view domains as a trip to Office Depot where you buy a box of pens, some notepads and a few reams of paper for the printer for $75

When presented with $XXXX options they will generally seek alternatives. Meanwhile, domainers which are stuck paying renewals on hundreds of domains which they cannot sell because there are too few buyers willing to pay a premium price for a domain name. Multiple the amount of available inventory by a factor of 500 and what do you think is going to happen? A lot of unsold inventory.

 

[mad409]

"Godaddy has shifted much of its marketing toward new TLDs and premium .COM listings have suffered."

Sorry for the suffering, good for new g's. LLL.com's has already been affected, slowly but affected. Seen one that sold for 18K or something like that, hmmm.

Don't get me wrong I love .com but hey times change, get ready IMO...

 

[dordomai]

Sorry for the suffering, good for new g's. LLL.com's has already been affected, slowly but affected. Seen one that sold for 18K or something like that, hmmm.

don't forget they were 3k a few years ago. Much of the price has been driven up by the Chinese bubble. You would expect a massive correction happening.

 

[dordomai]

endusers are going to get their names out anyway, thru advertisement. Even though .com is king, it doesn't mean the enduser cant get their name out and be bigger than a .com.

All we need is a large conglomerate to use a small unknown gtld and wham-o you have the broken ice.

a common misconception. you would need many conglomerates to really change something, actually you would need the majority of them using them. If you don't have this they are alternatives, not first choices. Just like .net.

.net never did well and future alternatives won't either unless they become first choice. Which is not going to happen.

Even ICANN members don't think highly of them.

Apparently, the Founding Chairwoman of ICANN is not a fan. Here is Esther Dyson saying that gtlds are "offensive" to trademark holders and that she sees no value to them. "I don't feel that (gtlds) add to the sum of human happiness", she added. "I'd rather see a whole bunch of intelligent people and a lot of money do something fundamentally more useful", s

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/2014...ck-ahead-why-the-gtld-program-may-not-succeed

 

[mad409]

a common misconception. you would need many conglomerates to really change something, actually you would need the majority of them using them. If you don't have this they are alternatives, not first choices. Just like .net.

.net never did well and future alternatives won't either unless they become first choice. Which is not going to happen.

What ever, you're just rattling off stuff around here you really have no clue about no more than me or anyone else, good luck.

No such thing as a pro in this business despite what many would like to think.

 

[dordomai]

What ever, you're just rattling off stuff around here you really have no clue about no more than me or anyone else, good luck.

No such thing as a pro in this business despite what many would like to think.

yes right. No one can make good predictions but just because the future is uncertain that doesn't mean that any unlikely scenario will become true.

If invest in a company developing Alien spas on earth for our friends in another galaxy, claiming millions will arrive soon, do you think that would a good investment?

Of course I can not predict the future but I can make guesses how likely it is that this venture will succeed.

Fact is that end-users while being aware of the new Gs don't develop them even after 2 years. They don't buy them. That is what is happening. There is no demand. no demand after more than 2 years = fail.

previous launches failed too. How many fails do we need before we can conclude that this concept doesn't work?

 

[mad409]

Fact is that end-users while being aware of the new Gs don't develop them even after 2 years. They don't buy them. That is what is happening. There is no demand. no demand after more than 2 years = fail.

And how long has .com been around, you fail to mention that within your replies bashing new g's. Chill out and let's see what happens and throw your magic 8 ball in the trash!

 

[dordomai]

And how long has .com been around, you fail to mention that within your replies bashing new g's. Chill out and let's see what happens and throw your magic 8 ball in the trash!

I am not even making predictions. They are failing and the media is reporting it. Not my prediction.

'.Fail followed by The.End' is my current prediction.

 

[mad409]

The.End' is my current prediction.

Good, your debate is weak.

 

[dordomai]

Why new top-level web domains are doomed to fail
Launch of new gTLDs represents a major change to the internet, but they are unlikely to threaten the existing marketplace

https://www.theguardian.com/media-n...2013/feb/12/icanns-gtlds-internet-domain-name

Why, Even After A Year, There's Still No Land Grab For New Internet Domains

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerka...-still-no-land-grab-for-new-internet-domains/

ICANN security advisor predicts “hundreds” of new gTLDs will “go dark”

Most new gTLDs have failed to take off and many have already been riddled with so many fraudulent and junk registrations that they are being blocked wholesale. This will eventually cause ripple effects on the entire domain registration ecosystem, including consolidation and mass consumer confusion as unprofitable TLDs are dropped by their sponsoring registries.

http://domainincite.com/19667-icann-security-advisor-predicts-hundreds-of-new-gtlds-will-go-dark

 

[Kate]

There are lots of good points made in the article and the follow-up comments. It's not like registrars are not promoting new extensions. They are.

And how long has .com been around, you fail to mention that within your replies bashing new g's. Chill out and let's see what happens and throw your magic 8 ball in the trash!

One key argument in favor of new extensions was the shortage of good keywords in .com. End users should be flocking to new extensions as a result. Instead they keep on buying .com or ccTLDs.

How long should we wait to see some action ?

To some extent this is catch-22 problem. Nobody wants to be the first mover. No big player wants to take a chance on a TLD that is not supported by at least a few big players.

In fact there are lots of issues:

• many domains are in fact not available, or you have to pay a premium price
  
• some TLDs have (very) expensive fees
• worse, the fees can increase in unpredictable ways
  
• some names were downright confiscated because they were allocated 'by mistake'
• in the minds of consumers .com is the first choice, and new extensions are not even a second choice
• bottom line, if they think $10/year for a domain is already expensive, how will they look at domains priced at $30 or $300 that they perceive to be inferior products ?
• why would they use those strings when nobody around them is ? They would be harming themselves and putting themselves in a less competitive position. Because if they don't trust them a lot, potential customers will react the same too.
• some TLDs are rife with spam and abuse, who wants to be in bad company ? Some sysadmins are openly talking of blacklisting new extensions at mail server level.

The irony is that even domainers selling new extensions are not running critical businesses on new extensions. Are they ?

 

[biggie]

Do new TLDs suffer from an awareness problem or demand problem?

neither, they don't suffer at all.....

only the people who register them suffer, when they can't sell them.

imo...

 

[dordomai]

I realized something in the past weeks. I had thought that time would work for the new Gs and against .com.

Now I see that it will work against them. Why?

Public perception of them is negative, the media does not like them. They are perceived as experimental, unnecessary and unpopular.

That is becoming how they are perceived by the public and is part of their identity.

Once you have a certain reputation it will be hard to change it. With each year they are not successful and not being praised by the media, they will be less likely to succeed in the future.

Once they are perceived as inferior and cheap, launching more of them won't help. It will just dilute them even further and make them appear even cheaper.

Extensions longer than 4 Chars are even less likely do well. Not surprising that Verisign considered buying .art and bought .web.

Here is what .club says:

We even went as far as interviewing an ex-employee from .TRAVEL. This individual explained that the extension ran into problems with ecommerce systems because of the number of characters in the name.

longer extensions run into problems? .brands are going to spend millions on immature technology? Are they aware of this?

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20160...strations_why_past_tlds_failed_why_many_will/

Once the nGTLDs are perceived as unpopular, businesses won't develop them and if they develop them they won't be popular. It will be where you go when you can't afford a good domain or a where the spammers go. The ones that go bankrupt and can disappear overnight. The ones that raise prices without warning. The unsafe and less reputable alternative.

Using a nGTLD will scream: "We are not a professional operation. we use the informal cheap URLs, that most businesses avoid."

Once the new extensions have that "stigma" associated with them, you won't be able to go back in time and fix that.

Screw up the first round and further launches will fail too.

If they don't change the way they are perceived by the public soon, they won't ever succeed. They will only be seen as inferior alternatives for many years to come.

At the moment it appears that public perception will not change and this will lead to a predetermined outcome.

 

[mad409]

@Kate

How long should we wait to see some action ?

Five years would not be an unrealistic time frame.

In fact there are lots of issues:

• many domains are in fact not available, or you have to pay a premium price

Lot's of great g's have been released but I agree many are held for a premium price. If they're to expensive they will remain unregistered. Other's are simply held because if ICANN. Even if a g is $300.00 per year and same renewal that's only $10.00 per day, any successful business can handle that. I spend more than that at Starbucks each day.

• some TLDs have (very) expensive fees

Repeated fact.

• worse, the fees can increase in unpredictable ways

I haven't seen this happen to me, if anything just the opposite is happening renewals are lowering on new registrations.

• some names were downright confiscated because they were allocated 'by mistake'

I've had that happen to me, name was held by ICANN, released by mistake. Systems are not full proof and whether we like it or not mistakes happen.

• in the minds of consumers .com is the first choice, and new extensions are not even a second choice

.com is the king, been around for decades, new g's are in fact a new choice for many new startups. The site's have been shown by many here at NP and are first choice sites. Simply untrue saying they are not even a second choice.

• bottom line, if they think $10/year for a domain is already expensive, how will they look at domains priced at $30 or $300 that they perceive to be inferior products ?

Repeated fact.

• why would they use those strings when nobody around them is ? They would be harming themselves and putting themselves in a less competitive position. Because if they don't trust them a lot, potential customers will react the same too.

I don't think trust is an issue, if no one is using them or want to as you've suggested how could this even be a factor. I wonder how coffee.club is doing?

• some TLDs are rife with spam and abuse, who wants to be in bad company ? Some sysadmins are openly talking of blacklisting new extensions at mail server level.

No bigger spam extension than .com, I can buy .com domains all the time for slightly over a dollar so cheap g pricing isn't totally the issue. It's the massive volume of registered .com domains that drives down their spam rating to 5% etc..

The irony is that even domainers selling new extensions are not running critical businesses on new extensions. Are they ?

I registered my primary business back in 1998, why would I change from .com? If I was starting a new business then I'd have no problem using a new g, reason being I have more choices of great keyword domains. I have bought several g's as redirects to my 1998 site.

Way to many armchair quarterbacks in this debate and so I revert back to my first reply of 5 years or so..