labrocca said:
Both examples actually strengthen the value of the original. imho same holds true here. Much of the reason for these new TLD's is not because we honestly need them but because companies want to cash in on the domain sales craze. The internet doesn't need biz, mobi, or info. They are second tier alternatives to CNO and more specifically to COM.
Domains are closest to collectable rare one of a kind items and mixed with land where the place/position can't be repeated. If you have house.com you have the best possible position on the internet. That's never going to change. Adding more extensions imho..will continue to show the value of CNO as dilution enters the market for these 2nd tier domains.
I've heard this argument many times and have never really bought it, essentially you are mixing up asset classes, the current print of Superman isn't a collectible yet you are comparing to to a comic book that is. With collectibles the item is valuable not only because of rarity but because of how many people desire that asset. If people are buying the just printed comics that creates demand for collectible comics. That isn't like domains where the item is mainly a business asset. Imagine if I told you that Hewlett Packard releasing a cheap new model will help Lexmark's sales....It is just like comic books! You'd laugh. Choice lowers prices, however buyers don't choose between a comic book just printed and a collectible one, they choose between comparable items.
The real estate anaology doesn't really apply well either because the larger a city gets the greater demand for land in close, in my view that is alot to do with the finite nature or land. More and more people in the city want to same spec of land in the center. That isn't the same as domains where new extensions mean a business may choose the new over the old, ie they see the old extension as
less desirable because they have more choice. New extensions don't result in more business wanting domains, it is isn't like land in a city.
If you really want to compare to it to land perhaps compare it to a city surrounded by tens of thousands of unoccupied houses, all for sale and at lower prices than the city. Would all those available houses help the land in the city? I doubt it because it doesn't help demand, it shows oversupply, it means more choice, and some will probably choose the cheap house with no neighbours rather than the city.
Now imagine if instead of not building any more houses builders just keep building 10's of thousands more every year, new largely empty suburbs constantly added, they are happy if 1 in 100 houses gets occupied, will that help the land in the city? Will people who previously could have only bought in the city (because the new suburbs didn't exist) now pay more for city land because it is surrounded by thousands of largely empty houses?
labrocca said:
Example:
http://www.doubt-themovie.com/ A 5 time Academy Award winning movie and when they needed a domain...they grabbed a very iffy dot com. Why not DoubtMovie.net or Doubt-Movie.net? Heck so many better combos outside of dot com but they chose the lesser dot com. We all know why...consumer recognition.
What does that have to do with new tld's helping .com? Or is you point that most companies will still use the established extensions? I think we already know that.
