question gTLD's are we repeating ourselves?

[MapleDots]

gTLD's are we repeating ourselves?

.global vs .international

.web vs .website

Seems to me global is better and .web is better

There has to be a culling at some point in time, I cannot see this type of duplication continuing in the long run.

Even

.com vs .company

If we use that as an example then .net would have to be .network

or .org vs .organization

All seems a bit convoluted to me

 

[Bob Hawkes]

I am not a fan of the duplication especially in plural and singular forms (loan&loans, review&reviews, etc). I can't understand ICANNs thinking when they were approved. Yes sometimes one is better but the confusion is terrible.

However I do see one compelling reason for having both say tech and technology and global and international etc. It gives more companies the opportunity to exactly match their company name to a domain (in the way DKC.technology does for example).

Bob

 

[Fancy.domains]

I mainly try to find two-word combinations that really makes sense, as it seems to attrect some end-users. I tend not to care that much about the extension itself, when it comes to new gTLDs.

A random example: Recently, I registered Silver.care as I think this two-word combination makes sense. I DID NOT register it because I am a huge fan of the .care extension. The combination is everything here.

However, extensins such as .com, .org, and some ccTLDs etc. are obvious exceptions, as one-word (and some two-word) names makes perfect sense as these are on high demand on the domain aftermarket.

 

[MapleDots]

I invest into what I know and that is .ca and .com with the odd OTHER thrown in. It would be very foolish for me to invest into something I know so little about. I have honed my skill to a particular niche for a decade and it has served me well.

There are other younger, braver souls out there that will take on the new gTLDs. I will mostly observe from the sidelines but I won't rule out the odd strategic investment.

I've dipped my toes into .app a bit but like I said in my opening post.... some of the duplication is puzzling me a bit. It's kind of like the whole double branding with automobiles with pontiac and chevrolet having the same vehicles with different nameplate. We all know how that turned out and I think a number of the new gTLD's will fail before some of the stronger players assert their dominance.

It will be an interesting time for sure but I'll have to see some proven sales for a period of time before I decide if I am going to invest.

 

[bmugford]

Absolutely correct

Can you please provide a citation for that; for instance something in the actual contract language between ICANN and the registry that forbids it? I am only aware of a registry needing to give notice of a price increase to ICANN and the registrar, who then needs to give this information to the registrant.

Frank Schilling for instance was going to raise prices for existing registrations -
https://domainnamewire.com/2017/03/13/godaddy-drops-uniregistry-domain-names-due-to-price-hike

Later they backtracked on that, but I don't think it was because they were not able to as much as the negative reaction from it - https://domainnamewire.com/2017/04/03/uniregistry-backtracks-price-hike-existing-registrations/

Brad

 

[HotKey]

.ooo from infibeam

I guess I have been lucky not to have encountered it yet.

Most of us have been lucky I think, but really, we shouldn't have to relay on luck when it comes to domain pricing. We need consistency which breeds trust. Even though they only increased the price by literally a couple bucks, I let the name drop. Hots don't play that game

We don't encounter it often because most registries have already classified all their extensions as standard/premium before release.

 

[Brands.International]

The second round of new gTLDs is only to come ... imagine how confused some will be then

Imo, the more options the better for end users
(but , unfortunatelly, not necessarily for us, domain investors ... but this is life)

 

[Brands.International]

I invest into what I know and that is .ca and .com with the odd OTHER thrown in. It would be very foolish for me to invest into something I know so little about. I have honed my skill to a particular niche for a decade and it has served me well.

There are other younger, braver souls out there that will take on the new gTLDs. I will mostly observe from the sidelines but I won't rule out the odd strategic investment.

I've dipped my foot into .app a bit but like I said in my opening post.... some of the duplication is puzzling me a bit. It's kind of like the whole double branding with automobiles with pontiac and chevrolet having the same vehicles with different nameplate. We all know how that turned out and I think a number of the new gTLD's will fail before some of the stronger players assert their dominance.

It will be an interesting time for sure but I'll have to see some proven sales for a period of time before I decide if I am going to invest.

Thanks for letting me know. I think it is very correct to invest to something one has good knowledge about, I agree totally.

The thing with new gTLDs is that new gTLD investors are getting knowledge in the process - no one can can say "I am veteran new gTLD investor" as we have them only since 2014 so I guess we are all still experimenting and learning...

Regarding proven sales, I personally think it will take years to have enough of proven sales recorded, and once this is done, all good names will be long time gone.

Well, they are gone already : my personal experience is this: I have opened WLTB thread here at Namepros 2 years ago, and bougth dozens of nice new gTLD names for 15-50 earch. Really nice names with standard renewals, people were happy to sell, they were early adopters who just wanted to flip them for few bucks profit. Now, in 2018, I have opened again WLTB threads, and I can not believe what is happening: either people send me total crap, or they will send me great name, but they ask 500 - 1000 for it, and they call it wholesale price - and I I know I would be able to buy this type of names here for 30-50 USD 2 years ago. Luckily I have enough inventory, but still....So times are changing quickly...

 

[johnnie018]

The thing with new gTLDs is that new gTLD investors are getting knowledge in the process - no one can can say "I am veteran new gTLD investor" as we have them only since 2014 so I guess we are all still experimenting and learning...

New gtlds started in 2001. I along with many others were heavy investors in .info and .biz, wish I never was. I squandered substantial time and money. Sales happened for me but never quite enough to cover reg fees, even in the best years.

I remember all the arguments about how they would succeed and that the world was changing.

 

[johnnie018]

.Info and .Biz are not new gTLDs ..term new gTLDs is generally used by most people here for new extensions which started in 2014.

.Info and .biz is something very old, as you say, from 2001, everything was already said and learned about them...the largest difference between those extensions and new gTLDs from 2014 is that they did not have premium renewals, so it was easier to invest (as you did not need to take renewals into consideration that much as we need to do today with new gTLDs)...

I'm sorry but they were new tlds, they are now old. They were called new tlds in 2001 and for many tears after.

So you are wrong in saying there is no veteran new gtld investors, there is plenty, though most are doing other things. Either other extensions or out of domains.

 

[NickB]

)When I first started my very first purchases where predominately gTLDs with awful combinations (and some real crap coms, info, biz etc) - not sold one of them and it was an expensive learning curve - they will not be getting renewed.

Once they drop I will have around 5% of my portfolio in what I think (others might disagree) are good matching gTLDs. I agree with @Fancy.domains that there is a market for good quality combo's, but my holding will reflect what I feel is the higher risk associated in selling them.

In regards to the OP's question, I do feel down the road there will be a major culling - to much choice is a bad thing for sales.

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-too-much-choice-is-bad-2018-10?r=UK&IR=T

 

[guillon]

Guys, you will love that document then: https://www.jovenet.consulting/tools/similar-new-gtlds

 

[Brands.International]

In my opinion ngLTDs were made to ruin the domaining industry. Domainers cannot stack up many in their inventories like they do with .COMs due to high renewals for 'premiums', while end users have no problem paying a large sum for renewal since it would be 1 or a couple more names they want to use. Also, with the wide range of ngTLDs there are plenty of available 'nice' names to reg.

ngTLDs are bad for this industry imo.

No one cares about domains investors honestly New gTLDs were created to give end users much more choice, which also means domain investors now need to think much more harder - if they want to stack up their inventories with some quality names, they really needs to be ahead of average end users - they can not just go like "oh, it is random LLL in .com so it will be worth at least XX XXX)...

 

[Jay Ha]

if there is one clear specific case of a non-premium becoming premium while still registered, could someone please cite the specific case. I am not saying it does not happen, just I have yet to find a case to support the claim when looked at.

Here's a case where you were involved in the comments but we never received an update on what happened to it:

Years ago I registered a .town domain name, a personal one for myself.

Just to be on the safe side, the user didn't specify for how many years he initially regged this name.

However suddenly last year (not known to me) the domain renewed @ $150 dollars!!! Apparently they have deemed my specific domain name a 'premium' domain and for that reason will bill me the same again.

However, it is clear from his words that the name wasn't dropped but renewed at a premium.
Link to thread: https://www.namepros.com/threads/town-domain-renewal-scam-apparently-premium-now.1112296/

Note: apologies to OP since this is off topic and it kinda hijacked your thread. We can continue our discussion in the thread mentioned above.

 

[Fancy.domains]

Personally, I think it is (more or less) madness to allow and launch thousands of new domain extensions. Still, in my role as a domainer, I invest to make a profit. And as long I can sell them, I will go on. Also, I find it funny!

I am sure that there are people selling sushi, who are not in love with sushi, but still makes god damn good sushi.

 

[Brands.International]

Can you please provide a citation for that; for instance something in the actual contract language between ICANN and the registry that forbids it? I am only aware of a registry needing to give notice of a price increase to ICANN and the registrar, who then needs to give this information to the registrant.

Frank Schilling for instance was going to raise prices for existing registrations -
https://domainnamewire.com/2017/03/13/godaddy-drops-uniregistry-domain-names-due-to-price-hike

Later they backtracked on that, but I don't think it was because they were not able to as much as the negative reaction from it - https://domainnamewire.com/2017/04/03/uniregistry-backtracks-price-hike-existing-registrations/

Brad

Just to clarify, my remark "absolutely correct" is related to following Bob's post:
"My understanding is that a domain name that stays registered cannot be later changed to premium, it is only when domains expire that, in a few cases, the registry convert them into premium (as .co and a few country codes now do as well)"

And it is really like that as far as I know. It means if you have registered your new gTLD names early, which means usually with low standard renewals, it will stay like it unless you drop the name. Then registry has right to reprice (aka simply attach some premium renewal to it) afaik. But not before you drop it. Or you can buy new gTLD names from early adopter and they will usually have low standard renewals attached to them, although they are high quality names. All claims so far that this is not happening according above logic were imo caused by the fact that registrants did not understand the first year discounting in new gTLDs, that is all I have read few posts here at Namepros about that, mostly from totally uninformed and pretty confused new investors, who do not know even what is the premium renewal...

In your post you are referring to something different, and this is is the change of price of standard renewal fee for particular new gTLD extension If I understand your post correctly. This of course can happen, it is not forbidden afaik, and it has already happened in several new gTLD extensions ...

 

[Fancy.domains]

Personally, I pay less for my gTLDs now than I did a three years ago. Reasons:

1. Many, non-premium names are sold with huge discounts nowadays (but with regular renewal fees).

2. There are more competition. Some registrars have cut their fees so the profit they are making per domain is really low. Same as some are doing with .com.

3. I have never experienced that the price of a new gTLD in my portfolio has risen. At least not dramatically.

However, I don't say that the prices may not rise now and then. Maybe I've been lucky until now?!

 

[cooljub]

They were called new tlds in 2001 and for many tears after.

Freudian slip?

 

[HotKey]

Have there been cases where a ngTLD that was continuously registered was changed to premium?

I rely on fact that existing registrations with standard renewals CAN NOT be re-classified as premiums, and so far it works like that 100%. But again, if some one has different knowledge, I would really like to hear abou it.

Names can be changed from a standard fee to premium throughout an active registration period. As long as the registry hasn't reached its premium limit allocation, they can reclassify a domain as they see fit.

Here you go (see image below), this was a domain I had paid standard fees for, and then this time around my renewal failed because the registry had repriced to premium. BTW registrars have no control over this.

 

[johnnie018]

If I included everything I would have had over $50,000 in .info and .biz sales, and $100,000+ in reg fees & purchase costs. I was sure it would turn profitable given time and so were many others. The sales you do get is what hooks you.

 

[Brands.International]

New gtlds started in 2001. I along with many others were heavy investors in .info and .biz, wish I never was. I squandered substantial time and money. Sales happened for me but never quite enough to cover reg fees, even in the best years.

I remember all the arguments about how they would succeed and that the world was changing.

.Info and .Biz are not new gTLDs ..term new gTLDs is generally used by most people here for new extensions which started in 2014.

.Info and .biz is something very old, as you say, from 2001, everything was already said and learned about them...the largest difference between those extensions and new gTLDs from 2014 is that they did not have premium renewals, so it was easier to invest (as you did not need to take renewals into consideration that much as we need to do today with new gTLDs)...

 

[MapleDots]

the largest difference between those extensions and new gTLDs from 2014 is that they did not have premium renewals, so it was easier to invest (as you did not need to take renewals into consideration that much as we need to do today with new gTLDs)...

Even makes @johnnie018 's point stronger don't you think?

 

[~ The 34 Year Buzz!!]

Every new extension has at least few "truly premium" real-world uses (paris.hotel / yummy.food etc) Most of them are a fools game.*
*ps. Even the worst altcoins (crypto) do not ever require a panic sell based on renewal fees.

 

[Jay Ha]

In my opinion ngLTDs were made to ruin the domaining industry. Domainers cannot stack up many in their inventories like they do with .COMs due to high renewals for 'premiums', while end users have no problem paying a large sum for renewal since it would be 1 or a couple more names they want to use. Also, with the wide range of ngTLDs there are plenty of available 'nice' names to reg.

ngTLDs are bad for this industry imo.

 

[Fancy.domains]

I am not a fan of the duplication especially in plural and singular forms (loan&loans, review&reviews, etc). I can't understand ICANNs thinking when they were approved. Yes sometimes one is better but the confusion is terrible.

However I do see one compelling reason for having both say tech and technology and global and international etc. It gives more companies the opportunity to exactly match their company name to a domain (in the way DKC.technology does for example).

Bob

Great post! I fully agree.