new gtlds Even experts are investing in new gTLDs

[Arpit131]

Konstantinos Zournas of OnlineDomain shares his investment in new gTLDs that amounts to approximately $50,000.
He shares on his blog, that he has bought 565 new gTLDs so far, for a total of $50,000 which averages to about $88 per domain name.
He has sold two new gTLDs : 360.agency for $2,500 and city.tips for 8,500 Euros.

Check out what the experts like him are buying and selling.
The article may be found here.

As per my personal experience, I happened to speak to some people who recently started in Domaining, got lured by the new gTLDs and their highest flips are among the new gTLDs that they have sold for over $2,000.
I see some bright light here, for them. Perhaps they would do even better when they switch to .COMs! Good Luck to them.

How many flips have you made in new gTLDs?
Any experience that you would like to share with the community?

 

[NameFit]

I think we always we have to look at 'who is the consumer, which is basically site visitors'. Any non-com TLD, when you advertise, you have to focus on the extension - because when the person looks at your extension, .net, .cc or whatever - hm....they must be some business and there is another and possibly better business under .com because .com is in everyone's mind. In the mind of the user, it does not instill the 'instant trust/faith' in the business if it is not .com. There is some inferiority built in. You just cannot compare the .com and non .com - there is difference of perception and that perception means a lot and as some say 'perception is everything' .

Another factor, I am sure if you give your address as .net, the user will try going to .com site which most likely exists. And will at least try to explore if they offer same or better services. After seeing your ad outside home or on tv, by the time they get to home/computer, they probably will not remember it was .com, .net, .co or something else - and they will type .com as that is 'default' extension. As a non .com site, you are just helping drive traffic to a rival's .com site

Another consumer point - all these gTLDs released are going to cause more and more confusion in the minds of users and .com will establish it identity further - if there is still something left. Value of .com's will still increase more and in a system when value and hence price of a commodity goes up, the value/prices of other commodities goes down. It is not that in future, we are going to get increased number of users significantly. I do not know the numbers, but I think internet usage is at very high anyways and is almost at peak in developed nations where the eCommerce business is done at the highest rate. Other countries are picking up, but will never reach any numbers close to developed nations. How much money Facebook makes from developing nations? do not think much. What I said about number of users not going up significantly, I would say the same thing about the number of businesses also (not) going up. Name is just a name and it is not a business. Name does not establish/spawn a new user or a new business - it just 'represents' a business. Businesses are continuously evolving, while new businesses are coming up, others are winding down as well.

I think there are plenty of .com's still available and will continue so - rate of dropped names has not gone down in past 15 years of so, if I have noticed. Not sure what the exact numbers are, out of about 115 Million .coms' registered, less than 5% have active websites. What does it mean, taking out few percentage points for under development, 90%+ are for sale. So plenty of sellers, and plenty of names also available - thanks to the multiple meanings/connotations of the same English word and tons of English words and 26 letters of alphabet. And when you get creative with the combinations, letters and words alike, there is no shortage of .com names still available to register.

Also, now look at the history, if you compare at the pricing of .com and .net - there is a huge difference in pricing. Actually the price of anything tells you how popular one thing is/how widely used it is. I would say .com commands a 10 times pricing than a .net. So if .com and .net were released at the same time, and there is so much difference in the pricing now, do you think other gTLDs will have any significant value in future? On the related note, every country has their own TLDs. As a .com seller, I have sold number of .coms to businesses which already had their extensions .co.uk, or .in or others.. Because they started with their own country extensions thinking that uses in their country users will type the country extension, but that did not turn out to be the case. As a business, even as I have an established and successful business in my country and a website under my country extension, I definitely want a .com - if not directly used, at least the traffic should be directed to my country website. I definitely do not want to lose type-in traffic. Instead of searching in Google and getting pages and pages of 'advertised' results, people just type in the website name in the browser - 'with a .com'.

To summarize, I would say to sellers/resellers which most of us here, besides just being visionary, look at the history of names, which is not more than 30 years old, and always think with the mind of a consumer and always see with the eyes of the consumer.

 

[Puckerhuddle]

If you have great keywords that span the dot these will be great names. Some categories such as all the photography related extensions will cause confusion and the value will be deleted. Certain gtld's are specific and these are the ones that I feel will have great value for marketing. Just a few examples .mortgage, loans, kitchen etc. Of course the most of the premium names in these categories command a hefty renewal fee that kills the upside for domain investors.

 

[brandnow]

This thread is filled with paranoia.

.XYZ is a good investment.. for 2 - 3 years from now. Out of the 900,000+ .XYZ registrations only something like 1/3rd were given away for free. So it puts it still well and above any other ngtld in terms of registration numbers. Furthermore, I read an article recently that Web.com is profiting from people who are choosing to renew some of the free .XYZ domain away for free.

Like most people here.. I think XYZ is seriously an odd extension.. but it is memorable (I think) and starting to catch on. But there is no aftermarket YET. There was an aftermarket for some .XYZ names right after launch. I think it is best to give it 2 - 3 years and then we will begin to see an emerging aftermarket for the most popular ngtld. Plus, the renewal rate on XYZ is only $9 / yr.. not too bad. What I think is a losing strategy are the registries with a few thousand registered names at $30 / yr. Eventually domaineers will drop some of their domains at $30 a pop / per year.. and a few thousand registrations will not sustain the registry anyways long-term.. those extensions will probably end up being the big losers.

One last note..

examples of good XYZ domain names:
music.xyz
sports.xyz
love.xyz

examples of bad XYZ names (for investment purposes):
WatchSportsNow.xyz
coolsite.xyz

For those of us holding desired single word .xyz names.. just hold on for a couple years more.. I think the aftermarket will come full force.

 

[Kate]

The thread title could actually be like this: Even experts are losing money on new gTLDs

 

[Hybrid Names]

He sold two domains at very good price

Good Luck to him

 

[kawalsukhi]

If he invest $50 k in buying 565 .com high end domains atleast he could sold half of it the next day with more heavy prices!!

Anyways good luck to him for selling the left 563 gTLDs!
Its sure and certain he would required to renew atleast 100 next year same day!!

 

[vivaldi]

When your renewal costs are more than your sales, that's not exactly a good plan. I don't see anything good in the stats posted.

Those who bought premium .com's in the 90's only to drop them after one year since there were few sales can't be happy. Do you think everyone are so stupid that they expect a good ROI after one year in this?

 

[billp3]

...and when that "point" comes... you're too late.

I disagree. You can still get started today in .com and make great ROI.

Pure speculation, as you put it, is investing; it simply means one has a higher risk tolerance.

True, but the more proper terminology should be used when talking about new gTLDs, especially when newcomers read threads like these.

I'm all for taking risks, but I think it will be a while (if ever) before the time comes that new gTLD's sell on a scale anywhere near .com. And when the point comes, you'll still be able to make money because it's an inefficient market.

 

[JB Lions]

Those who bought premium .com's in the 90's only to drop them after one year since there were few sales can't be happy. Do you think everyone are so stupid that they expect a good ROI after one year in this?

I get a good ROI after one year of buying .coms. And for you to actually post that, you have it in your head these are going to turn out like .com. Hold them, they're not worth much now and then sometime in the future they'll be worth something. We'll see how well that strategy works out.

50k then about 20K renewals - 70K, sold 12K. That's a lot of ground to make up just to break even. Thought it was a good blog post and probably indicative of the way things are going for most who bought hundreds/thousands of these. Probably losing money. And then will probably lose more waiting for that 5 years thinking somehow all the past arguments against these are somehow wrong.

If you want to earn big money you need to take risks, simple as that.

Or, you could simply buy good .coms on the Aftermarket just like all the "high profiles" you're talking about do. You have a much better chance investing into a known extension with a proven history than one most will never hear of and where there is just way too much supply.

As far as high profile, if you're meaning the person who wrote the blog post:

February-March 2014 (2 months): 335 domains
April-May 2014 (2 months): 139 domains
June-September 2014 (4 months): 60 domains
October 2014 - April 2015 (7 months): 31 domains

Averaged out per month:
167.5 domains a month
69.5 domains a month
15 domains a month
4.4 domains a month

Notice how that's trending down? Big time. Going from 167 new domains a month to 4, looks like a loss of enthusiasm to me.

 

[nomen]

So someone has to own a blog to become a gtld / domain expert?

Not sure if you read his blog or not but he seems very much expert to me.

 

[Asfas1000]

2 thoughts, 1 positive, 1 negative :

- He says he turned down several offers. If by accepting those he would have about broken even, then his investment is likely safe.

- When an expert with years of experience plus enough capital to invest plus inside info plus connections plus past clients lined up can only show $10 K in proceeds vs $50 K in acquisitions and $20K in renewals, what chances does an amateur have ? LOL

 

[hawkeye]

So someone has to own a blog to become a gtld / domain expert?

Haven't you noticed this before now? Been a benchmark for 'many' for awhile now. Go figure..

 

[vivaldi]

If that basket is a .com basket, it makes perfect sense since it's #1, there is no wondering or debate on that. You can have a diversified portfolio by investing in good keywords/domains in many different categories in that .com basket.

That $50,000 spent on new gtlds, would have been better spent on good .coms in the Aftermarket. Short term, long term, any term, it's a better investment.

Of course you can and probably should but it's still not wise to only invest in the same product. No serious investor do that regardless of industry and how good things are working out for the moment.

 

[mad409]

Of course you can and probably should but it's still not wise to only invest in the same product. No serious investor do that regardless of industry and how good things are working out for the moment.

A portfolio that includes a variety of securities so that the weight of any security is small. The risk of a well-diversified portfolio closely approximates the systematic risk of the overall market, and the unsystematic risk of each security has been diversified out of the portfolio.

 

[vivaldi]

For the moment? So something is going to happen where .com isn't #1? And it's not the same product. Product.com is different than brand.com different than geo.com etc. Anything can go with it, it doesn't get more diversified than that. I have .coms in many different categories.

I'm talking about investing in good keywords in a "sure thing" type of extension vs. investing in good keywords in maybe or probably not extensions. There is no debate if .com is going to make it. There is with these new extensions.

.com is the product. You never know, no one can be 100% certain. One indivudial don't decide the market. Domain names will stop to exist one day too, it's not like domain names are needed for basic survival. I take it you have no experience in investment other than in .com because if you did you would understand that things can and will change regardless of you emotions. Something that needs to be calculated for.

Exactly there is a debate if new g's are going anywhere hence the big risk and also the big upside. Good investors spread their risks over various assets. The investors who don't might learn it the hard way or just have luck surviving the years needed.

 

[GameOfBones]

I think a better strategy is to try to use your domains to make money. Build website and do arbitrage. Buying and holding and renewing causes most people to lose money. Think of the hours you have to put into it. Is it really worth it?

I just woke up so maybe I am talking nonsnese.

 

[Kate]

Because it is the mass of people that make great investments? No, they don't.

No, the mass of people don't invest in domain names, they just use them.
This is where the problem is.
It's always easier to sell domain names in extensions that are popular with the masses. Domaining 101.
If people balk at using new extensions, buying them for regfee, what is the likelihood that they will want to buy one on the aftermarket.
The odds are stacked against you as an investor.

It's been a year since the new extensions were released. Where are they know ? Where are all those prominent end users ? The advertising campaigns ?
I know, I know. Give it some more time. But do not expect major changes in five years.

I have lots of respect for Konstantinos but I am a tad surprised that he spent so much money on new extensions. He must have a healthy budget for mainstream extensions

 

[Kate]

Note that I'm NOT saying this will happen but if the new gTLD's became the norm in a few years you would lose a lot of money.

Is this what you believe ? Personally I prefer to save money than take a huge risk.

While nobody can predict the future for sure, looking at the present (and the past) provides a lot of clues.
I am not seeing the new extensions gaining traction now. Apparently end users are not embracing them. What's holding them up ? Could it be that new extensions are not a so great idea ? That hardly anybody wants them ? .com has grown as much as all new TLDs combined. That says it all.

Even assuming a science fiction scenario, that people start buying new extensions only, the 'old' extensions will remain dominant for a long time, simply because of the accumulated volume of registrations. Don't dream, people are not going to ditch their old URLs...

I have always said that new extensions would be marginal, and the fact that there are so many now available results in mutual dilution: very few will stand out. Background noise.

I am not saying that a modest shift cannot happen, but it will be modest and slow. Example: .club could become as 'popular' as .biz, big leap but that still doesn't spell success
Hoping for a major change of landscape in just 5 years is plain unrealistic. Do not underestimate inertia.

 

[Archangel]

And your point is?

These guys have money to tinker with. They can afford to lose. The fact that others are "investing" in new TLDs in itself means nothing in the scope of finding a shimmer of good. Just because some ppl are doing it doesn't mean it's actually worth doing.

"Donald Trump jumped off a bridge and lived, so..."

 

[NameFu]

Doesn't it all come down to sales strategy? There are people with great .coms who are not selling jack. There are people with bad .coms and selling like crazy. There is a small hand full people with new GTLDs who are selling. But in general, at the end of the day it's about your sales strategy right? I see shitty .coms selling regularly on DNJournal.com for thousands and on Flippa.com, because people believe that just because it's a single word.com it's worth thousands, even if it's something stupid like "spud.com".

Why not have balance by mainly investing in DOT COMs while taking an honest gamble with a few less popular extensions? What's the point of arguing this out? I see teams like with .Com VS New GTLDs ....it's like watching sports fans when it's not that serious....

 

[domainerfella]

How many new TLD's are there? 400? Going to grow to 700? Guys, it is a lost game unless you have keyword1.keyword2 combination. The insane crowding of new ones will only increase coms values.

 

[Fancy.domains]

How many new TLD's are there? 400? Going to grow to 700? Guys, it is a lost game unless you have keyword1.keyword2 combination. The insane crowding of new ones will only increase coms values.

I agree...

From a domain investor's point of view, I think only the really good combinations of keywords will sell on the aftermarket.

 

[vivaldi]

Is this what you believe ? Personally I prefer to save money than take a huge risk.

While nobody can predict the future for sure, looking at the present (and the past) provides a lot of clues.
I am not seeing the new extensions gaining traction now. Apparently end users are not embracing them. What's holding them up ? Could it be that new extensions are not a so great idea ? That hardly anybody wants them ? .com has grown as much as all new TLDs combined. That says it all.

Even assuming a science fiction scenario, that people start buying new extensions only, the 'old' extensions will remain dominant for a long time, simply because of the accumulated volume of registrations. Don't dream, people are not going to ditch their old URLs...

I have always said that new extensions would be marginal, and the fact that there are so many now available results in mutual dilution: very few will stand out. Background noise.

I am not saying that a modest shift cannot happen, but it will be modest and slow. Example: .club could become as 'popular' as .biz, big leap but that still doesn't spell success
Hoping for a major change of landscape in just 5 years is plain unrealistic. Do not underestimate inertia.

I do calculate risks and chance. Not taking different factors into account is stupudity. Afterall it's not we here who decide the outcome. What if Google et.al. started to push for them like they did with their bloated web browser. Most of us don't decide these things. Just look at .club, not the best extension but the biggest marketing budget = the most popular new extension that ain't free. The different generations look at this things differently. Many scenarios and factors to look into not just personal preferences and feelings.

Even if this all ends in your favour it is still possible to earn money on all this.

 

[mad409]

This tells me the registries themselves are the investors and slowly but surely they are closing the gap between anything that might be a profit margin for the secondary domainer, shifting as much of those profits as is predictable directly into their own hands. As someone on here mentioned, the registries are getting smarter. Don't forget they can always up their prices for top names, once they no longer need the initial investment that was so eagerly supplied by domainers. That's worst case scenario, IF a market develops for a tld and is capable of becoming successful. If a big enough one doesn't, then it switches back to lower and lower prices so domainers can buy in again. If that happens, its because they couldn't make the end user sales themselves.

I agree: http://domainnamewire.com/2015/05/08/3d-software-domain-name-sells-for-100000/

 

[DomainVP]

How about .xyz , is good to invest or is it gambling?

.XYZ is just about the riskiest of the .whatever domains to 'invest' in.

Over the extensions history it has been wrought with fraud-like tactics to inflate it's "popularity".

Most .XYZ domains that are registered, nobody wanted; they were auto-registered for domain owners and stuffed into their accounts.

They are promoting the .XYZ brand heavily, but it jus hasn't caught on.

Domains that mimic exact match keywords, also known as domain hacks, are the most profitable. The most valuable .XYZ would be abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw.xyz. Might as well register a .BIZ in my opinion.