Is .net losing steam?

[cam1taylor]

I noticed that a lot of names I've tried to reg recently have the .com and .org taken but the .net is available. Is the market for .net failing? What does everyone think?

 

[glaxxon]

Even i have noticed this. Personally even i stick to either .com or .org if i have a global target market and sometimes local cctld's if i have a local target market.
Many times i tend to go for a brandable .com instead of a keyword .net domain too. It greatly depends on the kind of market you are catering to.
I believe because there isn't as much awareness for .net among the masses as there is for the other tld's. People rarely see .net's in ads, bill boards, posters, etc.

 

[jmcc]

Well there are over 13 million .net domains and over 9 million .org. The .net market is more than just domainers. Some new registrants when registering their .com will also register the equivalent .net. However .com has the biggest number of domains with no equivalent registration in other TLDs.

Regards...jmcc

 

[Domagon]

.NET lacks identity.

What is .NET for?... Networks?, ISPs? .COM clone?, Programming?, etc.

To the layperson, the purpose of .NET is not clear. In contrast, most people view .COM as commercial / default catch-all, and view .ORG as being associated with organizations, non-profits, causes, etc.

Ask a bunch of laypeople what .NET is for and expect various answers - then go further, and ask what .NET sites they are aware of / visit ... at best, some may say their ISP while many others likely can't even name any.

Personally, I view .NET as being useful for internal use, such as domains that serve backend functions, such as, networks, servers, dns, etc.

Ron

 

[glaxxon]

.NET lacks identity.

What is .NET for?... Networks?, ISPs? .COM clone?, Programming?, etc.

To the layperson, the purpose of .NET is not clear. In contrast, most people view .COM as commercial / default catch-all, and view .ORG as being associated with organizations, non-profits, causes, etc.

Ask a bunch of laypeople what .NET is for and expect various answers - then go further, and ask what .NET sites they are aware of / visit ... at best, some may say their ISP while many others likely can't even name any.

Personally, I view .NET as being useful for internal use, such as domains that serve backend functions, such as, networks, servers, dns, etc.

Ron

I agree. Even though there are a few good .net sites (mostly networks, now that you mention it), but they generally own the .com counterpart too and redirect type-in's from there.
For example the themeforest network.

 

[bmugford]

Some facts about .NET -

1.) There are 13.5M .NET regs
2.) .NET is the second most popular gTLD in the world.
3.) There are 300,000+ new .NET registered every month with a net gain of 75,00+ per month

Alexa stats -

116 of the top 2000 traffic sites are .NET
1000 .NET are in the first 16,000 Traffic sites. 1 in 16.

For comparison, here are .ORG stats -

49 of the top 2000 traffic sites are .ORG
1000 .ORG are in the first 31,000 Traffic sites. 1 in 31.

The "domainer" market might be weak for .NET, but the end user market is strong for quality generics.

Brad

 

[steveteva]

.net market is not falling just like all tlds there are some drops.
There are 3 gtld in the world that is well recognized:
.COM .NET an ORG

Then comes .tv, .biz, .info

 

[Domainace]

The name I get the highest offers on in my portfolio is a .net - and those are mostly offers from domainers. And it is growing, and recognized internationally. I have also had good luck with small sites built around high search .net names.

It's a bit scary to buy .nets when they seem so devalued by domainers in general, but I suppose that's how all opportunities appear. The last thing you want to do is just buy the trends that everyone else is buying.

I agree there is a bit of an identity crisis, but identities can be reinvented in the most unexpected ways.

 

[cam1taylor]

It seems to me that other than regs with the same .com end users aren't registering .net names by themselves

 

[alien51]

The "domainer" market might be weak for .NET, but the end user market is strong for quality generics.

I agree with your view.

I have lots of dot nets, and they rank well in search results. A couple of them even rank No.1, since the COMs were owned by domainers who either parked them (and therefore, deindexed), or contain minisite-quality content and therefore got pushed down the search results. Some of my dot nets are full-blown e-commerce sites. A couple i sold to brick-and-mortar end-users selling their own merchandise.

They like ".NET" because it is brandable, since it rhymes with INTERNET, which in turn is synonymous to being "online", it gives people a hint that this must be an online shopping store. So when you market a website like "weddingshop.net" (just an example, i don't own this domain), people can readily identify that this is an online store where they can buy stuffs for their wedding. How could anyone mistake it for something related to computer programming?????

And besides, "ORG" is widely known to be something related to groups (as the name implies). And you are not supposed to sell merchandise on an ORG. And BIZ is a more obscure extension, compared to a NET.

 

[enlytend]

And you are not supposed to sell merchandise on an ORG.

???

So if you had a site BagpipePlayers.org, a place for Bagpipe enthusiasts to learn about, share, and discuss their hobby, it wouldn't be appropriate to sell bagpipes, accessories, books, music, etc?

But the thread's about .net. For most US end users, it's second only to .com (unless .org is a better fit.) For small, local businesses, if it comes down to a choice between a .net for reg fees or a .com for $xxx-xxxx they'll probably get the .net.

They're perfectly fine for building sites - unlike some of the more "exotic" extensions, they have the recognition and credibility to get decent click through and can perform well.

 

[the_poet]

I don't think .NET is dying, but I agree that it never caught on (unfortunately). It had huge potential but IMO it's always been underestimated, looked at by many as the "stepbrother of .com".

 

[alien51]

So if you had a site BagpipePlayers.org, a place for Bagpipe enthusiasts to learn about, share, and discuss their hobby, it wouldn't be appropriate to sell bagpipes, accessories, books, music, etc?

I was just bringing up the original intent of the ORG extension being created for "non-commercial" organizations' use.

But since, the extension itself is not regulated, you can practically put anything you want in there.

The argument in the thread is that - what comes to people's minds when you say .NET? Someone said it's related to networking like Cisco, or stuffs like that. Well, it can also mean that something is "online"... meaning, your business goes online.

With .ORG, what comes to mind is - RED CROSS, CANCER SURVIVOR GROUPS, CHURCH GROUPS, HOBBYISTS,... but not exactly commercial sites of the WALMART or AMAZON kind.

 

[Coopey]

Funnily, I was thinking the opposite just last week (i.e. it's picking up steam).
A "Visit South Africa" billboard appeared around the corner from me.
The webaddress? www.southafrica.net

 

[alien51]

I would like to add also, that many people are SUSPICIOUS of "exotic" extensions, because these extensions are often used by spammers and hackers, because that's the closest they can get into registering keyword-rich domains that would show higher-up in the search results. For example, a lot of Viagra spammers use .cc or .biz, and pirate softwares and torrents are often traded in a lot of .info sites. In fact, i'm speculating that more than half of all the .info ever registered, are just minisites.

 

[lothos]

I like .net a little better than .org, and I definitely like both better than .info.

 

[steveteva]

I want to talk about website credibility. For commercial, there are 2 main witch are .com and .net (I'm not talking about ccTLDS) all the rest gTLDS or other ccTLDs being see as gTLDS like .me, .TV, .CO, .ws don't have it but can be used for specific niches.

So . net will always have great value and the market for .net failing is not going to happen.

When you see .com reg and .org but not .net the domain name must not be intersting but try to check gererics or south after keywords you see .com, .net reg....

 

[Jawed]

There is no competition between .org and .net.

.org has an entirely different purpose whereas .net is regarded as the only alternative extension to .com. if you don't see the .net version taken, that means the keyword doesn't have much value.

 

[alien51]

if you don't see the .net version taken, that means the keyword doesn't have much value.

That may be true. But sometimes, when the com is occupied by a popular enduser, you'll see that the rest of the extensions are just being "squatted" by domainers. Well, this may probably prove that the keyword domain is valuable. But the question is, it is valuable to whom? I think the rest of the extension owners are just waiting (and hoping) for the com owner to buy them out. If you type the domain based on keyword searches, none of these extensions show up except the COM (presumably because these extensions contain poor content or just parked). I wonder how they make money out of these extensions.

In fact from my experience as an enduser com owner, i see a couple of the downline extensions of my domain drop out through the years, picked-up by another, then dropped again after a year..

From an enduser standpoint, I'm not sure if it makes business sense to go head-to-head developing a .NET domain against an established and popular .COM version owned by someone else. It would be confusing for target audiences if they show up together on the same page of Google results. I rather pick a different COM instead. I only develop a .NET when i see that the COM is parked and up for sale by a domainer asking for astronomical moolah.

 

[Kate]

IMO, yes .net has lost some steam.
.net used to be the fallback extension when the .com was taken but today the ccTLDs are much more mature, often they are the first choice before or just after .com.
Unlike .net .org does not suffer from the 'missed the .com' stigma
It's still a valid TLD but a couple good points have been made above. I tend to avoid .net unless it really fits well. For example technical/Internet-related stuff.