"It is the single biggest mistake one can make on the Internet"

[IAmAllanShore]

According to Rick Schwartz, the "...single biggest mistake one can make on the Internet" would be registering and promoting a .net that you don't own the .com for also.

I know that many a 'folk here have .net's that they don't own the .com for, myself included.

<snip http://www.dnjournal.com/columns/cover020204.htm >
Still, Schwartz thinks the new extensions are a better bet than one old-timer, .net. “.org is the #2 extension because of its widespread use with charities and heavy TV and print advertising. .net is the orphan. It has no identity and loses massive amounts of traffic automatically to the .com counterpart. Not basing your business on a .net extension is the #1 piece of advice I would give anyone that asked. I would choose .whatever over ANY .net unless you own the .com version. If you promote .net, and don’t own the .com, you are likely working hard for someone else and wasting 15%-25% or more of your hard work and marketing efforts. It is the single biggest mistake one can make on the Internet.”

Schwartz recognizes that “it is statements like that where folks either totally agree with me or hate me for saying it. But it is FACT and the more the fact is shown the greater the hate grows. Having a .net to base your business on is like building a boat with a BIG gaping hole in it. What does it say about the boat owner/builder that gets angry when you point out that HUGE LEAK?”
</snip>

Can't help but think that this guy has made millions and millions doing this, so he must know what he's talking about... but at the same time it's depressing to think that 3 letter .net's might even be OVERvalued right now...

-Allan

 

[America First]

I always thought this was a major problem, the .com/.net When i see the poker site ads on TV they are using alot of .net sites and i just think WOW they are not very smart about this. I agree with Rick, and it is what it is, do you build a site (forget legal) cbssportsline.net? All CBS does is push this website,CBSSportsLine.com, Where can you promote the site with out losing 30 to 50% of your clients, because they forget the .net and go .com.
We all know .com rules, could`nt this be said for extensions, .org.info.biz.tv? I see alot of people reging .TV, well do they have the .com? I doubt it, Regardless of the extension (.TV) making the most since for names like, sports.tv NBC.tv but why buy it if you don`t own sports.com. I think that we as domainers see a chance to buy a name that we can`t believe is avalible under an extension we just say it has to have a value. Example: beef.co.mex you like it? would you buy this name? think long and hard before you answer, it could cost you 100$ per year, is that what you would pay? Beef.com sold for $xxx,xxx OK THEN GO REG. IT. it`s avalible. So who really wants it. Its no .com.

 

[yandig]

Because of the prevalence of bookmarks, I can't see why having the .net without the .com would be too big of a deal. Look at partypoker_net for instance. Most people go to their site once and then sign up, and if they do return to the site, it's via a bookmark or other link, not a type-in. And even if people do type in the domain, only a few will enter the .com instead of the .net.

I think this might be an issue where the site wasn't well known, yet the domain was considered a unique, 'brandable' term, such as yahoo or google. In that case, people might assume that the site had the .com address instead of the .net.

Judging by the poll results (27/8) right now, .net is still a very viable extension.

 

[Grrilla]

I always thought this was a major problem, the .com/.net When i see the poker site ads on TV they are using alot of .net sites and i just think WOW they are not very smart about this. I agree with Rick, and it is what it is, do you build a site (forget legal) cbssportsline.net? All CBS does is push this website,CBSSportsLine.com, Where can you promote the site with out losing 30 to 50% of your clients, because they forget the .net and go .com.
We all know .com rules, could`nt this be said for extensions, .org.info.biz.tv? I see alot of people reging .TV, well do they have the .com? I doubt it, Regardless of the extension (.TV) making the most since for names like, sports.tv NBC.tv but why buy it if you don`t own sports.com. I think that we as domainers see a chance to buy a name that we can`t believe is avalible under an extension we just say it has to have a value. Example: beef.co.mex you like it? would you buy this name? think long and hard before you answer, it could cost you 100$ per year, is that what you would pay? Beef.com sold for $xxx,xxx OK THEN GO REG. IT. it`s avalible. So who really wants it. Its no .com.

Using "Sports" as an example, Sports.com is, no doubt the top dog. My suggestion to the owner of Sports.TV, (regardless of whether or not he owned Sports.com), would be to register SportsTV.com and dump the budget and energy into promoting the .com.
TV is a strong enough acronym keyword/term w/ a high enough profile- to pull this off, *if* used as a sffx w/ a strong, thematically correct keyword, as would be the case of "Sports". co.mex, lacks "TV"'s profile, so that's really an apples-oranges comparison.

But, there is no doubt in my mind that developing a .net site w/o the .com is putting money into the .com owners pockets. I have a high traffic .com site that sees a healthy income as a result of someone else's efforts in developing the .net version. I hope they are doing well w/ the .net, wish them continued success and encourage them to keep up the good work!

I have ___TV.com was unable to get the . TV version of the "_____" which is a strong prfx for TV. Wish I had the .TV, but I have no complaints- I've got the high hand and I know it. So bring out those chips and let's build the pot up, boys. To help cut down on the size of my portfolio, some of the first names that get cut are the .net names that I originally registered to support the .com with. (Note I'm not talking about names that are on the front of the development list). So, like seeds, out go the .net's and if they find an owner who wants to water and care for them, all the better.

Gee, I don't remember ever thinking like this before I started registering domains. Ah, the domain name business- there's nothing else, quite like it. :sold:

Because of the prevalence of bookmarks, I can't see why having the .net without the .com would be too big of a deal. Look at partypoker_net for instance. Most people go to their site once and then sign up, and if they do return to the site, it's via a bookmark or other link, not a type-in. And even if people do type in the domain, only a few will enter the .com instead of the .net.

I think this might be an issue where the site wasn't well known, yet the domain was considered a unique, 'brandable' term, such as yahoo or google. In that case, people might assume that the site had the .com address instead of the .net.

Judging by the poll results (27/8) right now, .net is still a very viable extension.

Bookmarks are having their impact on the extention hierarchy and traffic spillover. I use them almost exclusively, but still find myself landing on Examplecom.com sites, from time to time when traveling in new territory. It's not a question of whether or not .net is viabile and income can be derived from developing it. It's a question of how much spill-out the .net the owner is willing to put up with and whether or not the owner is better off looking for a .com name to funnel resources and efforts into w/o the problem of having traffic drawn away by the .com neighbor, an event, which, despite an increased use of bookmarks, continues to occur. IMHO

 

[DN Tycoon]

I have a simple theory about good .net names that have the .com registered by another. If the .com is not being used or is being parked then I will snatch the .net and develope a site around it then sell it on the market. The way I look at it is if the person who registered the .com is not using it and for whatever reason did not reg the .net then it has great potential to develope and sell. Now as far as me starting a business with a .net while the .com is in anothers hand is another story. If the name is really good and deals with hosting and again the .com is not in use then yeah I would jump in on that but it the .com is in use then it's not only bad business but it also causes confussion in which you will be on the bad end of the stick since most people will remember your DN as a .com and not .net. IMO

 

[Ulchie]

I believe that the .COM is THE best, BUT - I believe there are exceptions to EVERY RULE!. 2 of the 3 biggest money making poker domains I own are .NETS. These domains make $75 per day in Pay Per Clicks.

Dont believe me..... Just go look for a typo on PartyPoker.NET or PokerStars.NET (these are the 2 biggest poker sites and THEY DO NOT have a TRADEMARK) PokerStars has applied for thier TM , but since PartyPoker's TM was abondoned, they will only get a Logo TM like PartyPoker did. You are not going to find any .NET typos because the smart people (like myself) starting seeing TV commercials for PartyPoker.net and PokerStars.net on the TV. Why are they advertising the .NET instead of the .COM? Well it is a FREE site to play on the .NET (play money). It is a great tactic to lure your into this game of free poker and then when you think you are good, you deposit money and play on the .COM.

The reason they are advertising .NET is because the .NET is their free poker site that lures people in. Remember some TV and media networks will not allow advertisers to advertise casinos or gambling related institutions, so in order to get around this the companies promote thier FREE poker sites since they aren't advertising an actual casino or gambling institution. Then once people are there they can be lured into the .com side where the real money poker accounts are. Otherwise they would all advertise thier .com sites. Not just that, but if you look, partypoker.net logo's on TV contain a VERY SMALL .net on purpose. This isn't by mistake. There are reasons why they are all advertising thier .net extensions instead of their .com extensions. Plus any advertising on thier .net extensions is sort of like advertising the .com anyways if Schwartz's theory is correct, which I know it is. How many people realize its partypoker.net if they just glance...? They will remember it later as .com in quite a few cases.

 

[anyweb]

The reason they are advertising .NET is because the .NET is their free poker site that lures people in. Remember some TV and media networks will not allow advertisers to advertise casinos or gambling related institutions, so in order to get around this the companies promote thier FREE poker sites since they aren't advertising an actual casino or gambling institution. Then once people are there they can be lured into the .com side where the real money poker accounts are. Otherwise they would all advertise thier .com sites. Not just that, but if you look, partypoker.net logo's on TV contain a VERY SMALL .net on purpose. This isn't by mistake. There are reasons why they are all advertising thier .net extensions instead of their .com extensions. Plus any advertising on thier .net extensions is sort of like advertising the .com anyways if Schwartz's theory is correct, which I know it is. How many people realize its partypoker.net if they just glance...? They will remember it later as .com in quite a few cases.

Fair enough. That makes sense.
What about the 5th most popular english language site in the world being a .net according to Alexa ....passport.net
Do you have an explanation for that?
http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=lang&lang=en

 

[America First]

The reason they are advertising .NET is because the .NET is their free poker site that lures people in. Remember some TV and media networks will not allow advertisers to advertise casinos or gambling related institutions, so in order to get around this the companies promote thier FREE poker sites since they aren't advertising an actual casino or gambling institution. Then once people are there they can be lured into the .com side where the real money poker accounts are. Otherwise they would all advertise thier .com sites. Not just that, but if you look, partypoker.net logo's on TV contain a VERY SMALL .net on purpose. This isn't by mistake. There are reasons why they are all advertising thier .net extensions instead of their .com extensions. Plus any advertising on thier .net extensions is sort of like advertising the .com anyways if Schwartz's theory is correct, which I know it is. How many people realize its partypoker.net if they just glance...? They will remember it later as .com in quite a few cases.

WoW, I did not know that, that is a great way to get around those laws. I am a Big Gambling name person and this is great, maybe i should reg. some of the .nets :o: L@@KS like . net IS BACK ON FOR ME!

**Just checked for sportsbookaction.net REG. and it was taken.. http://sportsbookaction.net/
Taken, i was wonder why i was getting that many hits on MY sportsbookaction.com Looks like this proves the point, im benifiting from the .net