.mobi Good news for mobile, nothing good for Mobi

[karamba]

CNN is set to re-launch its CNN mobile service this week, and has secured car company Lexus as its first advertiser on the platform.

CNN Mobile is re-launching as the news network's first direct-to-consumer WAP service, and will feature a searchable 14-day news archive with over 2,000 stories, as well as a news SMS alert service covering categories like business, weather, entertainment and lifestyle.

The service, which first launched in 1999, will be available in...

Article continues below


... Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America to all handsets by entering cnnmobile.com.

Lexus will have banner adverts on the mobile site for its Hybrid vehicle at launch and also have a pre and post roll advertising on the service's 'World News Now' two minute video update, which will be available to all 3G users of CNN Mobile. The advertising deal, which was developed by media agency Zed, will run for the first month of the new service.

I will also add that speech is about cnnmobile.com
Not cnn.mobi

 

[mjnels]

labrocca has too many people on ignore to even see the arguements posted..whats that tell ya?

 

[ofclean]

More mobile users = bad for .mobi.

The more mobile users there are, the more phones will improve, and the more people will go to the "regular" site on the mobile device.

.mobi would have been good 2-3 years ago, but it's dead now.

EDIT: SO MANY TYPOS

 

[dag]

More mobile users = bad for .mobi.

The more mobile users there are, the more phones will improve, and the more people will go to the "regular" site on the mobile device.

.mobi would have been good 2-3 years ago, but it's dead now.

EDIT: SO MANY TYPOS

Oh yes, I forgot to add ofclean to my list...thanks for the reminder.

 

[mjnels]

More mobile users = bad for .mobi.

The more mobile users there are, the more phones will improve, and the more people will go to the "regular" site on the mobile device.

.mobi would have been good 2-3 years ago, but it's dead now.

EDIT: SO MANY TYPOS

very sexy opinion.

being able to tell the future is nice i bet.

 

[ofclean]

It's looking at past trends, not telling the future.

 

[mjnels]

It's looking at past trends, not telling the future.

nice try.

 

[scandiman]

More mobile users = bad for .mobi.

So to use your logic, fewer mobile users = good for .mobi?

 

[whitebark]

I agree that there are .mobi supporters who blind themselves to anything not completely positive -- I'm not one of those. Similarly, there are several in the anti-.mobi camp who are so eager to see it fail that they'll say anything, no matter how inaccurate, illogical, or simply uninformed, to bring out the negatives. Whitebark is one of those, and you sometimes straddle that line yourself, Labrocca, although I've seen more balanced opinions from you from time to time. :imho:

I'd tell you to go fly a kite but the technicalities involved...

I own mobi domains so i am as entitled to say whatever I want about it. That includes showing that the mass of the mobi crowd is rather deluded to reason as Labrocca and other more senior domainers have pointed out.

In two years when the vast majority of lousy mobi domains are dropped there will be those like me saying - I told you so.

Really what is so hard to figure out - .mobi IS NOT THE MOBILE INTERNET! So any mobile news is not exclusive news for .mobi. Clearly when a company chooses NOT to use the extension in favor of another it suggests clearly to the non-deluded that they have little faith in the extension. But in bizarro world which .mobi is becoming even bad news is good news.

It boggles the mind, but please go ahead and try to claim me as the board .mobi hater. Those in the know read these threads and don't bother responding because once again as pointed out earlier - it's a waste of time. Much like talking to walls.

The largest domain holders almost to a tee don't own .mobi domains beyond one or two very good keyword ones - if that. That also suggests something, but once again, that bad news is good news to a mobi fanatic. Ought to be entertaining to see how that tidbit of information is taken to be good for .mobi.

.mobi is becoming cult-like, I couldn't agree more. See what they resort to when ANYONE dares make a differing opinion? If you disagree you must be "hater, anti-mobi" etc. You don't see .net fanatics screaming anyone down for saying .com is better. But dare say anything contrary to the .mobi group-think...

Now let's simplify all that for those the slow on the uptake. WhiteBark owns mobi domains. WhiteBark doesn't hate .mobi - pretty hard to hate an inanimate object but I digress, WhiteBark WILL take the opportunity to point out fallacies in thinking such as the CNN example being good for .mobi. WhiteBark will buy more .mobi domains that are strong keywords, but will avoid 99% of them on this board because in any extension they are barely worth reg fee. That doesn't make WhiteBark a mobi hater, it makes him a .mobi realist.

Clear?

 

[ofclean]

So to use your logic, fewer mobile users = good for .mobi?

Not really, fewer users = stagnation for .mobi.

Oh yes, I forgot to add ofclean to my list...thanks for the reminder.

List? O.O

 

[mjnels]

I'd tell you to go fly a kite but the technicalities involved...

I own mobi domains so i am as entitled to say whatever I want about it. That includes showing that the mass of the mobi crowd is rather deluded to reason as Labrocca and other more senior domainers have pointed out.

In two years when the vast majority of lousy mobi domains are dropped there will be those like me saying - I told you so.

Really what is so hard to figure out - .mobi IS NOT THE MOBILE INTERNET! So any mobile news is not exclusive news for .mobi. Clearly when a company chooses NOT to use the extension in favor of another it suggests clearly to the non-deluded that they have little faith in the extension. But in bizarro world which .mobi is becoming even bad news is good news.

It boggles the mind, but please go ahead and try to claim me as the board .mobi hater. Those in the know read these threads and don't bother responding because once again as pointed out earlier - it's a waste of time. Much like talking to walls.

The largest domain holders almost to a tee don't own .mobi domains beyond one or two very good keyword ones - if that. That also suggests something, but once again, that bad news is good news to a mobi fanatic. Ought to be entertaining to see how that tidbit of information is taken to be good for .mobi.

.mobi is becoming cult-like, I couldn't agree more. See what they resort to when ANYONE dares make a differing opinion? If you disagree you must be "hater, anti-mobi" etc. You don't see .net fanatics screaming anyone down for saying .com is better. But dare say anything contrary to the .mobi group-think...

Now let's simplify all that for those the slow on the uptake. WhiteBark owns mobi domains. WhiteBark doesn't hate .mobi - pretty hard to hate an inanimate object but I digress, WhiteBark WILL take the opportunity to point out fallacies in thinking such as the CNN example being good for .mobi. WhiteBark will buy more .mobi domains that are strong keywords, but will avoid 99% of them on this board because in any extension they are barely worth reg fee. That doesn't make WhiteBark a mobi hater, it makes him a .mobi realist.

Clear?

Are you even listening to anything anyone has said?

its like you wanna stick with the original arguement, even when you were countered.

 

[dag]

.mobi is becoming cult-like, I couldn't agree more. See what they resort to when ANYONE dares make a differing opinion? If you disagree you must be "hater, anti-mobi" etc. You don't see .net fanatics screaming anyone down for saying .com is better. But dare say anything contrary to the .mobi group-think...

Now let's simplify all that for those the slow on the uptake. WhiteBark owns mobi domains. WhiteBark doesn't hate .mobi - pretty hard to hate an inanimate object but I digress, WhiteBark WILL take the opportunity to point out fallacies in thinking such as the CNN example being good for .mobi. WhiteBark will buy more .mobi domains that are strong keywords, but will avoid 99% of them on this board because in any extension they are barely worth reg fee. That doesn't make WhiteBark a mobi hater, it makes him a .mobi realist.

Clear?

My argument was with your auto comparison, which was an incorrect analogy. I wasn't defending the whole "CNN=positive" thing -- as I stated, I don't mind a well-reasoned argument against why .mobi will succeed. I don't blind myself to the negative, and I don't call everyone who feels that way "anti-mobi." However, when one makes as many negative posts about .mobi as you have, while showing so little of a balanced perspective, I can only think of you as "anti-mobi." I seem to mostly recall your arguments being based on what you would or wouldn't do with a mobile phone or what you think other seasoned domainers are or aren't doing. Sorry...that's just the way it seems.

 

[mjnels]

Some people are just more concerned with the "who has been a domainer longest" merit badge... and being able to say "HA! I told you so" when something happens.

 

[qO_Op]

More mobile users = bad for .mobi

Yeah good one! :lol:

In my case, when there are more mobile web users (= end users), then I will spend more money on advertising my .mobi sites that are in progress. (Sorry but its only been a few months, gonna need a little more time for development, what with my day job and all!)
:yell:

 

[scandiman]

fewer users = stagnation for .mobi.

So more mobile users=bad for mobi and fewer users = stagnation for .mobi.

Am I correct in surmising then that in your opinion, mobile web use has no bearing on the success of .mobi?

 

[seanboy]

Similarly, there are several in the anti-.mobi camp who are so eager to see it fail that they'll say anything, no matter how inaccurate, illogical, or simply uninformed, to bring out the negatives

COUGH! DNF! COUGH!

 

[labrocca]

I used the Manson family only as a humorous reference only.

If you think that cars sold by ford are a bad example...let me try a better one.

In the 70s there was emerging technology called "The Electric Car". Now the car was "new" technology yet it really did the same thing as old cars except it was restricted to so many miles on a charge and it ran on electricity. IMHO...similar to mobi where in reality it's NOT a new technology rather an old on with restrictions pretending to be something new. Now can you please tell me how well the electric car did in the long term? Did more car sales mean good news for the electric car? How about battery sales..did more battery sales mean good news for the electric car. It's a perfect example imho because more mobile device sales isn't good news for mobi...it's good news for mobile which is NOT the same. The more mobile websites that are NOT mobi is HURTFUL to mobi as an extension. It basically says to end-users...mobi is NOT our choice of extension for delivering mobile content.

It's so damn clear and plain yet some of you insist that this is good news for mobi. It's not. How do you presume this? What's your logic?

Now great that you have some mobi domains and can make some money...that's all good...but don't try to BS us with hype and unrealistic tales of mobi positive new from cnn dismissing mobi altogether. That's spin and it's not suitable in a discussion where people spend real money in hopes of making more. Be realistic in your domaining.

lol...cultmobi.mobi is available...someone better grab it.

 

[mobidick]

The largest domain holders almost to a tee don't own .mobi domains beyond one or two very good keyword ones - if that. That also suggests something, but once again, that bad news is good news to a mobi fanatic. Ought to be entertaining to see how that tidbit of information is taken to be good for .mobi.

Why should they care, when they are raking in millions from an established model, which is keeping them busy? Right now there is hardly any traffic in the mobile internet, and virtually no income from parking .mobi domains.

But that's also the point... increasing mobile TRAFFIC = increasing value of .mobi (by association). It's very obvious to those of us who got excited reading vcool's dir.mobi traffic report in an earlier thread: see 'Your Developed .Mobi Sites With Traffic'.

As for CNN, the contact email in the whois points to their legal dept 'tmgroup', which suggests a defensive reg, as opposed to a move by their marketing dept; however, as someone else has pointed out in an earlier thread, there are some very influential marketing people who haven't even heard about .mobi, but at least one was quickly sold on the issue, as reported in an earlier thread... I also spoke with a marketing rep for yellow pages online division, who was surprised to hear about .mobi and wanted to know more.

I am also a domainer, who tuned into .mobi late; at first I was disappointed with the immediate prospects for traffic and parking monetization, but it dawned on me that developing was the way to go. Now I'm glad that the biggest domainers passed .mobi by, as smaller players are more likely to develop their sites or sell them to end-users.

 

[hawkeye]

In the 70s there was emerging technology called "The Electric Car". Now the car was "new" technology yet it really did the same thing as old cars except it was restricted to so many miles on a charge and it ran on electricity. IMHO...similar to mobi where in reality it's NOT a new technology rather an old on with restrictions pretending to be something new. Now can you please tell me how well the electric car did in the long term? Did more car sales mean good news for the electric car? How about battery sales..did more battery sales mean good news for the electric car. It's a perfect example imho because more mobile device sales isn't good news for mobi..

uh, not really a good analogy labrocca, as the electric car, like alternative fuels and early hybrids, was decimated for failure by the 'incahoots' oil and car industries. It's only been of late as the consumer pressures or demands have forced it back to the forefront of interest. just an observation here. :tu:

 

[scandiman]

In two years when the vast majority of lousy mobi domains are dropped there will be those like me saying - I told you so.

If foolish registrations is how you measure the relevance of a tld then .com must be the worst tld around based on the .com crap I see being dropped every day. No one here is defending the registration of LookAtMyLame.mobi, nor do these lame registrations have any bearing on the future of .mobi.

Really what is so hard to figure out - .mobi IS NOT THE MOBILE INTERNET!

Who in this thread is saying it is? I certainly haven't.

 

[ofclean]

So more mobile users=bad for mobi and fewer users = stagnation for .mobi.

Am I correct in surmising then that in your opinion, mobile web use has no bearing on the success of .mobi?

It does have bearing, and it isn't good.

.mobi like having an extension for different screen resolutions: cnn.1024x768, cnn.1600x1200, cnn.640x480. It's absolutely insane and silly. It just gives more opportunities for squatters, and it isn't needed because websites should detect browsers/adjust to the correct resolution.

.mobi is reliant on phone/mobile technology to flat line; the better screens, browsers, and input sources get, the more and users will want to visit the real site while on the go, not an text/barebones version.

I have a feeling that you're all going nuts for .mobi to artificially pump up your investment.