If domain names are the real-estate of online business, is the extension the location? Does this tested-and-true adage apply to the Internet real-estate realm?
I think location location location is relevent with domains in a different sense than bricks-and-mortar. It is more of a stand-alone feat than the area it's located in. You can have a crummy neighborhood (eg .xyz), with an exemplary rated building in it (eg. abc.xyz). Or vice-versa: dot-com is the go to extension at any given time, but that doesn't mean there arent hundreds of thousands of horrible buildings in it.
Traditional extensions work because the location is historically recognizable, but they are really only used as a means to an end. With ngTLD's, both the left and the right of the dot are integral to their success. A "the medium is the message" philosophy can be adopted into the name, albeit almost better be painfully obvious for it to work.
Location does matter just as much as what you decide to build on it, when used properly.
Thoughts welcomed.
I think location location location is relevent with domains in a different sense than bricks-and-mortar. It is more of a stand-alone feat than the area it's located in. You can have a crummy neighborhood (eg .xyz), with an exemplary rated building in it (eg. abc.xyz). Or vice-versa: dot-com is the go to extension at any given time, but that doesn't mean there arent hundreds of thousands of horrible buildings in it.
Traditional extensions work because the location is historically recognizable, but they are really only used as a means to an end. With ngTLD's, both the left and the right of the dot are integral to their success. A "the medium is the message" philosophy can be adopted into the name, albeit almost better be painfully obvious for it to work.
Location does matter just as much as what you decide to build on it, when used properly.
Thoughts welcomed.
and great analogy.
