Dynadot

discuss GTLDs – Email Security: number 1 reason to buy the dot com

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

Arpit131

Top Member
Impact
4,441
As a business owner and a domainer, I have never been a fan of the new GTLDs because of the headache it gives me when I think about actually using them as a URL in the real world. Explaining them to people you meet in the normal course of a business day. The leakage of traffic when advertising and marketing. Just the whole confusion they create when explaining or navigating to the URL. However, that pales into insignificance when you take into account the business disruption and security risk of not receiving emails by them going to the dot com version.

So just how much of a problem is email security?. I have a dot com version of a dot co uk being used by a business actively and wondered how many emails get lost just by the confusion of .com and co.uk; this can be increased by 5 fold in my book when you use say a new gTLD – green.cars (loss to greencars.com greencars.ccTLD plus the non-plural versions).
Godaddy has a feature whereby you can catch all emails sent to that domain and forward all to one email address. I have never used the .com for many years and it was very easy to separate emails intended for the .com from emails intended for the business running on .co.uk

The results are shocking and I will provide a screen shot of those emails received just in the morning. But in conclusion in one 24hour period, these emails were for the business residing on .co.uk.
1 email from a national newspaper to the CEO
3 requests for quotations
1 internal system password confirmation email from the IT department!
2 purchase order confirmation
10 inspection reports
18 just general emails some personal about dinner date

This article was published on Domaining Tips


What is your take on this? Do you disagree?
 
1
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
0
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back