NameSilo

.info .info getting more popular?

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch
Impact
0
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
I agree .info is generally not a good choice for a business to use for its main website....unless of course the business itself is about providing informational content. There are many ways businesses can make a relevant and proper use of .info names to provide info about their specific products/services; for instance, a multinational nutritional company has its business site at http://www.infinity2.com but provide all the in-depth info about their products and research data at http://www.infinity2.info/
 
0
•••
mole said:
.INFO actually means Implicit Names For Optimization (of keywords). :$:
Shooz ,Mole people will find out the Big secret about .info's
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Too late, mole did it ....again.
 
0
•••
Binfus said:
Its my hunch (hope) that as the Internet continues to grow, mature, and categorize there'd be an increased focus and desire to match names/websites to the most appropriate tld resulting in a much higher adaptation of newer gTLDs

The formulation of robust taxonomy strategies and categorization with domains is largely a pipedream with old namespace. You have 800lb gorillas and MNCs sitting and farting on many nodes within any one desired network construct. Even if you had $250m to invest, you would not be able to extract these names from the various owners.

With new namespace you can, within very reasonable means, create huge complete keyword and category MAPS with semantic perfection.

This takes the 'theory' out of keyword networks, and allows new and credible business models for Internet addressing systems to be created without have to resort to 'made up' appendages just to simulate a 'set' so prevalent, and useless, in old namespace eg. b2b-poker.com, b2b-sex.com, b2b-business.com...

Jimmy Changa said:
Too late, mole did it ....again.

I farted? :p
 
0
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back