new gtlds McDonald's says NO to gTLDs (New Domain Extensions)

[TRY]

McDonald's no longer has plans for new gtlds and terminate it agreement with icann.

"The restaurant chain applied to run the .McDonalds and .MCD top level domain names, but it recently sent termination notices (pdf) to domain name overseer ICANN voluntarily relinquishing the two domains.

It joins a host of companies that applied for so-called .brand top level domain names that have decided it’s not worth the expense or effort."

Source: http://domainnamewire.com/2017/07/05/mcdonalds-takes-domain-names-off-menu/

 

[1Darko]

I wonder why they applied at all? They don't need security features for customer online transactions, therefor no safety hazards.
All they need is to show the customer the location, opening time and menu!

 

[Charles Carreon]

That burger flipped pretty quickly.
ICANN overcooked it.

 

[offthehandle]

@Kassey Lee commented on his article on the use in china on the DNW blog:

http://coreile.com/c170624.html


(3) senior executives do not understand .brand

So this one simple statement speaks volumes of .Brand and .Whatever's too. If supposedly we assume that large companies never adopt them and the majority have dropped the idea of them (5 years later of the 664 applied, only 567 remain) and these same companies have executives of intelligence and "educated" higher than the general public, ...then how are the general public going to ever accept these??? lol.

 

[pablohc86]

"companies that applied for so-called .brand top level domain names that have decided it’s not worth the expense oreffort."

Someone say: better late than ever.. After spend a lot of money, they have understood :D

 

[guillon]

Wrong choice.

 

[keston57]

When there is something new people just rush into it without thinking of the long term effect. Most of the new extensions are useless.

 

[Fancy.domains]

And I say no to McDonald's

 

[tetrapak]

Why was it a good idea in the first place? Mcdonalds.com is straight forward, if you have .mcdonalds as extension, what do you put behind it? Menu.mcdonalds? Then you have to create a bunch of domains instead of having one main site. Main.mcdonalds, restaurants.mcdonalds, they are all too complicated. It makes sense for brands like Google which offers different services, and instead of news.google.com you could type in news.google. Less so with corporations with subbrands like Gillette. Most people don't even know it belongs to P&G, so why bother gillette.pg, when gillette.com makes perfect sense?

 

[namezest]

Maybe they decided not to because of the .pink goop ?

 

[DnEbook]

So Fat Ronalds decided not to Super Size

 

[HotKey]

Wrong choice.

This is actually good news for domain investors. Any company that decides to withdraw or forego with their own branded extension means they are open for business to the global TLD market. Many of these privately branded extensions just wouldn't make marketing sense- sure they might be great for "intranet" purposes, for the real Internet, you need names with a punch, attention-grabbers.

Dot-McDonalds = Dot-McFlop

They want punch? Envision Big.Mac or the likes.

 

[Argentum]

gTLDs is biggest scam of all time. All Gtlds investors wasted their money not just McDonalds.

 

[tetrapak]

Big.mac is a cool idea, or Best.burger, but Mcdo.com as main site should stay.

 

[Sanwal]

Not looking from a domainers perspective but a company and their corporates perspective.

It's plain stupid period, even if they had to spend a few thousand dollars on it (I know it costs anywhere from a few hundred thou to a millions). Rather give the money to their executive bonus at the end of the year or better as charity.

This news seriously has no value or an insight for us domainers, if you're comparing .com's or whatever to new gtld's.

It's been said a hundred times before and i'll repeat that again, only the top top new gtld's will work (Which in total maybe less than a few thousand) but when a company gets as big as Mcdonalds they would not want to spend millions or billions of dollars educating customers about their new gtl'd.

Ok,
Let's take X company grows their brand on a .co or a .net or whatever. Would they want to spend millions of dollars advertising their new GTLD, or a fraction of that advertising the .com? (If they look towards global expansion)

I know i might not have explained it well at the end, but when i have a bit more time, will definitely elaborate on that.

Best,
Sanwal

 

[Sanwal]

Plus i'm sorry if people over here could not understand that, my vocabulary and english since coming back to my home country has weakened significantly, thus can't explain stuff properly for the past few months, but i'm sure the people who got the point wouldn't care about that.

 

[Sanwal]

Ignore, repeat post.

 

[Duncan729]

Plus i'm sorry if people over here could not understand that, my vocabulary and english since coming back to my home country has weakened significantly, thus can't explain stuff properly for the past few months, but i'm sure the people who got the point wouldn't care about that.

Your English is fine!

 

[EmotiveDomains]

Clearly the correct decision. A corporation this size obviously knows what it's doing.

 

[JB Lions]

There really is no need for any of them to use a .brand, this works just fine - https://www.mcdonalds.com

 

[dordomai]

the.end

 

[betthelot]

But we were told FOX News was migrating to dot.brand that would bring the awareness we needed.
Even Fox had a flashy page saying it was launching in spring 2016 @ nic.fox which is still live.
Its not happening mainstream, keep kicking it in the long grass and say give it another 5 10 15years this is just a classic example of the physiological problem called investors biased

 

[TestCase]

Clearly the correct decision. A corporation this size obviously knows what it's doing.

But the fact that they have reversed course and have decided NOT to pursue their own gTLD strongly indicates that a corporation of this size obviously doesn't always know what it is doing.

But I agree, it is the right decision.

Corporate TLD's just strike me as vanity for the sake of vanity...

 

[Sanwal]

But the fact that they have reversed course and have decided NOT to pursue their own gTLD strongly indicates that a corporation of this size obviously doesn't always know what it is doing.

But I agree, it is the right decision.

Corporate TLD's just strike me as vanity for the sake of vanity...

Was trying to make the same point, couldn't have simplified and worded it better!

 

[Branko Jovanovic]

Any kind of generic top level domain still needs a market or target audience. So it has to be really generic to have generaly wide audience.