new gtlds Mike Mann: “Read my lips gTLDs are D*E*A*D, absolutely no demand!”

[lennco]

Mike Mann shared on Facebook my article about the bad landrush phase that .Blog domains had last week and also shared his views on the New gTLDs in general:

Read my lips gTLDs are D*E*A*D, absolutely no demand! This was the best out of thousands, along with .web and .app Better luck with other snake oil. .Com stays king. If you also voted for Hillary, rough week. TYVMI.

He also made several other comments about new extensions such as:

How about don’t but them at all, they serve no purpose and cause many problems, and waste a lot of time and money.

Now that everyone knows gTLDs are dead, please Google “Mike Mann gTLDs” and you will see I hit the predictions spot on.

He continued by quoting my article:

Ruggh ruoggh, too many scooby snacks: “So the .blog registry made more than $150,000 from the landrush phase. That doesn’t seem bad but the registry spent $19 million to get rights for the .blog new extension.” Not counting millions per year of overhead. Lesson learned, listen to the mann next time and stick with .Com

He then made more comments like:

“Don't renew your fancy new gtld domains. The experiment is over. No material resale market will take root.”

Mike replied to a comment made by Phil Harris

26 million registered and new sites being launched daily .. X.company being used by Google , Rightside stock just raised to buy status by zachs investment firm .. Awareness growing , secondary 6 figure sales being made , Mike I would say you should watch the movie God is not dead ..

by saying

sure sounds like a bubble

Mike today talked about Google and .soy:

Google spent some energy telling me how ".soy" domain extension was going to be the next big thing a while back, I tried to splain what was up….. Not to discount the fine folks, fancy offices, and great buffet. Googs, gimme a buzz, I’m still a know it all.

Drinking own Koolaid instead of listening to grassroots in the streets

Technically I havent checked the sales numbers but lets take a wild guess, dramatically lower than their expenses…….. like I told them nicely before they invested

Konstantinos Zournas November 14, 2016
http://onlinedomain.com/2016/11/14/...nn-read-lips-gtlds-dead-absolutely-no-demand/

 

[guillon]

I think it depends where you sit. It is too early for the domaining business and if the speech is negative today, registration volumes increase so it should change in the future...even if it takes time.

 

[frank-germany]

what do you think how long will it take?

for my lea.name find a wealthy lea to buy it
I own it since 2009

 

[namezest]

18 months ago Mike said something similar. Now after that time is he saying that as someone who has invested in them himself, or as someone with a massive portfolio with huge renewals and therefore a vested interest in dismissing them at every possible opportunity?
He will always say that about gTLD's. No Demand? The numbers of registrations might show end users are getting what they want for a far better price and explain lack of sales. Are his sales down? I would hazard a guess and say Definitely Yes.Numbers don't lie, people do!

A word of advice.... Don't put all your eggs in one basket ??

 

[GoKaizen]

Over 70% (18 million) New Domains are Parked

http://adamyamada.com/over-70-18-million-new-domains-parked/http://adamyamada.com/over-70-18-million-new-domains-parked/

 

[168]

Glad to hear Mike won the .soy debate

I told porkbun not to buy .blog @ namescon 2
Glad they listened.

I have received offers this year in the low x,xxx for .Global, Media, .Direct, .Tech, .Digital and even .Fish!

Fitting he posted on Facebook check out Facebook.Design

The momentum is building
Happy Hunting!
Cheers

 

[gary-glen]

I believe money is to be had with gTLDs, but it's not where I wish to dine. Thank you very much, but I'll stick to my usual order...give me another dotCom

 

[gary-glen]

I feel for the newbs! This is enough to blow their minds...and budget! Expect a lot of drops

 

[garptrader]

The breakeven sales price assuming 1% turn and $10 renewals with 20% marketplace commissions is an average sale of $1250 - an amount which would likely be reported by many nTLD holders. Many new TLDs have much higher renewals than $10 which would require higher average sales prices or higher turn. For example, a 100-domain nTLD portfolio with $40 average renewals would need a $5000 sale just to break even.

Let us assume 20 million aftermarket new TLDs

1% turn would translate into 200 thousand new TLD aftermarket sales annually - nearly 4000 weekly

We are now three years into the new TLD experiment - 34 months plus

Instead of dozens of threads of your latest new TLD registration, we should have a thread with new TLD sales with tens of thousands of personal (not registry) sales. Could someone point me to that thread?

Excluding reported registry sales which sometimes are dubious or merely brand protection registrations, how many domainer-held aftermarket new TLD sales do you see reported each week? Do you see thousands of aftermarket new TLD sales on each weekly DNJ report? Hundreds?

Those who learned a little about domain selection before new TLDs were rolled out may have some sales. However, we clearly do not see evidence that new TLDs are generating the sort of turn needed to maintain the portfolio with sales revenue. Yet renewal costs are often higher than .COM. Why would you pay higher cost for inferior results?

 

[Recons.Com]

This never gets too old, I guess )

nGtld intolerant ones will bring all the facts and info why they are unsustainable and bad for end users and nGtld proponents will write that they personally seeing great success with their sales and that Google is backing/buying those so they are the future.

I haven't read the previous 50+ posts, but something tells me this sums up the discussion pretty accurately.

 

[168]

The intolerant's don't know or don't like to include facts about .com

Let's not point out the .com 99cent sales/freebies, just the New "G" 99 cent sales/freebies.
Let's not remember the days .com was 100 reg fee per year, then 70, then 50, then 35 etc. and now 8.99
Let's not point out the days when you could renew unlimited .com's for 1.29 Yes folks there was a time.

Yes indeed. Just how did .com become king of monopoly ?

 

[Recons.Com]

The intolerant's don't know or don't like to include facts about .com

Let's not point out the .com 99cent sales/freebies, just the New "G" 99 cent sales/freebies.
Let's not remember the days .com was 100 reg fee per year, then 70, then 50, then 35 etc. and now 8.99
Let's not point out the days when you could renew unlimited .com's for 1.29 Yes folks there was a time.

Yes indeed. Just how did .com become king of monopoly ?

This is not politics. It is business. And it is not about fairness and if .com had first mover advantage, that is a fact and it would take billions of $ to try to put a dent in that, just like trying to overtake .pdf or making a cola more popular than Pepsi or Coke, even though both of those are crap and it is easy to make better product.

Now .com, differing from Pepsi or Coke, has quality advantages too, even if it were to start today.

1. Looks (visually pleasing, differing from .xyz, for example)
2. Letters (c, o, m are used in any Latin letters based system, differing from, web, for example)
3. Meaning. Can stand for .Com/mercial, .Com/pany, .Com/munnication
4. Pronounceability (differing from xyz, gdn etc.)
5. Shortness. Minimum length of 3 letters, differing from .blog, .club, .news
6. No confusion with plurals, differing from the likes of .review, .reviews

I can't recall any of the ngtlds that could provide the .com/plete package of the above...

 

[168]

In these forums it is politics. It's about buy American ".com" and the rest of the world doesn't matter. The arrogance is appalling.
History matters. Business cycles matter and most aren't aware nothing "reigns king" forever.
Coke was once the only choice, now there are several hundred choices of "soda" all doing just fine and consumers accepting many different choices over just one. The Car industry is a better example. "Ford" "the only choice" now there is hundreds of choices and Ford still exists.

New "G" supporters understand the "dent" in .com will be minimal, still promote .com AND also understand New Demand will continue to increase as more of the world conducts business/recreation/personal interests/shopping/education etc. online.
The "G" stands for growth. New "G"s are going after the GROWTH MARKET NOT the .com/erce/pany market.
This isn't about a takeover or attack. It's about offering relevance for the entire global market with several verticals that didn't even exist before now.
if it were to start today....

Is the whole point in mentioning how it started with high costs, cheap promos (just like the NAYSAYERS complaints of today )
AND promoted as "the only choice"

New "G"s have quality advantages too , 1-5 applies to New "G"s too . 6. Completely agree plurals will be messy. Same applies to .com's

It's unlikely .com would be preferred in today's choices especially with the shorter .country hack choices by the way.

No Sh*t your a commercial company trying to communicate via the internet. that's quite "generic" and not very "relevant"
given the many reasons people are online today."recreation/personal interests/clubs/shopping/education/media/entertainment etc" There are several polls out about "relevance" .club if that's what your looking for is much more "relevant" than .com and shorter than adding club to a .com xyz, .wang, .top has "relevance" in the Asian markets but not in English markets.
The Asian markets are creating their own "relevance" and it doesn't matter if it is "relevant" in English.

There is a big difference between "the only choice" and many "relevant choices" of interest globally, available at a reasonable cost.
Mann's "declarations" are about ignorance of a global perspective from a myopic point of view. A Hitler of domains. History matters.

 

[ezcoms]

In a business standpoint unless you have a pretty popular keyword like "sex" .whatever the you may have something worth while. You can make money by developing it or selling it to a person in the adult business that knows what he's doing.

If you think people are going to buy: virtualsceniccartours.club for $1000.00 then you're wasting your time and effort.

I see work trucks driving around. They usually have the business name .com. Or even mom and pop's business Larrythehandyman.com or .net. The smart ones do that. They wouldn't have .club, .ninja. Imagine yourself as a working man putting mikesplumbing.ninja or Erictheroofman.online or .rocks .... I've watched these domain millionaires strategize and make videos promoting the new life of the new extensions. Just another way of selling ice to an Eskimo.

I've always been gold with .com, .net, .org and even a .co --

Save your money and buy a good domain.

 

[ezcoms]

And relevant to .com is why are my emails blowing up for people wanting to buy my LLLL.coms and the emails have mandarin and broken English?

.Com and .Net no matter how much domain Sherpas and people turn you into over night domain scholars, your vintagescholaticboooks.today domain isn't going to sell. Even a drunk domainer will register a nonsense .com before that.

 

[frank-germany]

guys we are discussing a future scenario

nobody
nobody knows the future

so actually we all will see what will happen

no need to become upset
if you don't like the scenario
relax
maybe it takes a different road

who knows

 

[AuctionBio]

As of current scenario,
I do agree what Mike Mann is saying,
we are trying to analysis him on as an domain investor, but if we see his statements in view of an end user, than it really does have good value IMO.
Most of the end users even have no idea about the other gTLDs. and they don't give a dime to it.
com is staying there and not loosing its value, gTLDs will come and go. New gTLDs will also keep on coming.
I have read some of the comments that he being having a huge portfolio that why he is underrated gTLDs. I would tell these views as lame and I already given reason above.

 

[frank-germany]

Mike Mann shared Logan Flatt's post.
11 hrs ·



Logan Flatt
16 hrs · Addison, TX, United States ·
In investment terms, .com is midtown Manhattan. ICANN's newly approved extensions (e.g., .tattoo, .reviews, .auction, .map, etc.) are northern Alaska without any mineral rights.

 

[dordomai]

In investment terms, .com is midtown Manhattan. ICANN's newly approved extensions (e.g., .tattoo, .reviews, .auction, .map, etc.) are northern Alaska without any mineral rights.

Alaska can be beautiful. Problem is, few people live there.

 

[frank-germany]

Alaska can be beautiful. Problem is, few people live there.

due to global warming plan for buying land in alaska now

 

[Apprich]

Small percentage of .gTLDs are used for startups.. This could be evidence of how they will be consumed.
So, It's not completely DEAD but there is less significantly demand than it's expectation.. On the contrary ccTLDs are doing far better than gTLDs ... It's not worth to invest on gTLDs at the moment..But difficult to guess in 5 years from now..

 

[kemjika11]

Wise domainers are probably cautious of general gTLDs, and at worst invest in a few, proven ones, like .xyz, .club. No smart domainer investor will jump into gTLDs like they would the main extensions we are all used to seeing/trading in, unless they are ready for the long haul, have strong insights/confidence, or have cash to waste/risk. We all agree the registrars are the big winners, but at whose expense did they win?yup...its not a very rosy story.

 

[Recons.Com]

Small percentage of .gTLDs are used for startups.. This could be evidence of how they will be consumed.
So, It's not completely DEAD but there is less significantly demand than it's expectation.. On the contrary ccTLDs are doing far better than gTLDs ... It's not worth to invest on gTLDs at the moment..But difficult to guess in 5 years from now..

Thanks for the illustration.

You can invest in .com and compete for a sale to a startup out of 818 in next period or you can invest in ALL gtlds to compete for a sale to a startup out of 25 in the same period.

And, of course, it is not about exact numbers of 818 and 25 and it is not about funded startups only, it is about ratios. For every .gtld sale there are 33 .com sales.

Now add on top that a .gtld normally has to be an exceptional quality one, differing from just made up .com very often, and those exceptional quality ones require exceptional renewal fees.

So what you are left with as a gtld investor? 33 times less chance of a sale with renewal costs that can be 10 times or more higher. And now also remember that chance of sale for .com is not very high either (0.5%-2% for most) and renewal costs add up to tens of thousands for portfolios of x,xxx size and you can see that, with the exception of handful, you are setting up yourself for a loss bigly.

 

[Enwych]

Well, I'll be renewing ElizabethWarren.rocks until 2020. Just saying.

 

[decode]

@Adam27 with over 70% of new domains parked that's likely a standard shared through all domain ext.

How many .com's are parked, or on sales pages or don't resolve?

I love .com but more than 70% are not in use.

Choice is good for everyone. No domains will go up like the initial free registrations of .coms in the early days. That ship sailed. These new gTLDs are a nice opportunity. Just like there are still excellent .coms available. But no one word .coms are available without a big budget and many people are enjoying getting one word or short gTLDs.

More money has been lost investing in .coms that never sell than any other ext. it is what it is.

It's super cool to be able to get some nice short one word domains and new gTLDs allow for that.

These new gTLD help .com value and help the overall domain business.

Cheers

 

[Helloeveryone]

Some of them is perfect for some reasons
The ones i like is meby.email mevia.email
Contact@ meby.email Contact@ mevia.email are perfect to me