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/

 

[deez007]

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

I'm wondering how Mike wants us to "read his lips" when his statement was a text comment on a social media platform, if he wanted us to actually read his lips he should have uploaded a video.

See, Mike is not some almighty superior being who sh*ts ice cream, a highly talented domainer no doubt but still a human being who is prone to mistakes and being wrong.

Lets not forget that his is also open and often boastful of this constant TM infringing domains. So he has no problem squatting on an existing brand for the benefit of his own pocket. Why do people assume he wont deliberately make negative comments about gTLD's not because he actually believes it but to protect his own investments, protect his pocket?

 

[decode]

Plenty of new gTLD's will falter. Plenty will work out well for businesses. Domainers will lose a lot and some will make a lot. The key is there is a mid-market that can be served with these new domains and focusing on that can make a nice profit IMO.

If anything gTLD's are bringing the idea of "good" domains to people and letting them get started and will help .com in the long run. I'm happy with many new gTLDs.

There were some good points in the article, one of which is that a lot of people will waste a lot of money on new gTLDs. Remember a lot of people waste a lot of money on .com names. Check out how many expired .com domains there are every single day. .com is the most valuable but not the only value. The loudest voices against new gTLDs seem to be from people with ultra premium .com names.

Wouldn't any business buying a new G also diversify and also have some .com names?
Two huge mistakes:
1) The owners of some new gTLD co's are the defacto domainer, keeping the top names out of sight or overpriced when the entire idea of new gTLDs was to bring these new names to market.
2) Cost of renewals. You could buy 150 of ___________.anynewgtldonsale today for under $200 bucks. But how much to renew? Keeping the renewal costs super low would help all these new gtld co's grow and keep renewal rates higher.

 

[frank-germany]

I own lea.name
I had a lot of .mobi and .tel and .biz

now tell me what better with a .club?

 

[disaac81]

Finally this trademark abuser says something that makes sense...well done Mann for stating the obvious. Think that makes you a guru? No sadly not.

I sold 2 names yesterday from my website, yet I have less than 200 names on there. Do I shout from the rooftops? No. It is business.

Mann has 300,000+ names and still feels the need to abuse trademarks. Desperate. Unprofessional. Lame.

 

[frank-germany]

I

Finally this trademark abuser says something that makes sense...well done Mann for stating the obvious. Think that makes you a guru? No sadly not.

I sold 2 names yesterday from my website, yet I have less than 200 names on there. Do I shout from the rooftops? No. It is business.

Mann has 300,000+ names and still feels the need to abuse trademarks. Desperate. Unprofessional. Lame.

I sell a lot of domains that I don t talk about

So what ?


Thank you Mike for letting us know your mindset

 

[disaac81]

I


I sell a lot of domains that I don t talk about

So what ?


Thank you Mike for letting us know your mindset

So nothing.

You can learn from Mann if you want, your choice.

 

[dtagr]

Still ignoring the new gTLD's. Still making my money on .com/.ca

 

[Fancy.domains]

I own lea.name
I had a lot of .mobi and .tel and .biz

now tell me what better with a .club?

Personally, I think .club is great for clubs, just as .org is great for organizations and so on.

 

[tonyk2000]

It is of course always interesting to read opinions of industry veterans, like Mike Mann or Frank Schilling, on different business aspects. In this particular case, however, one can imagine some "parallel universe" where mr. Mann founded one or more new-gtld registries, while mr. Schilling did not. They both would say exactly the opposite. Since in our universe it is natural for mr. Schilling to support new gtlds and for mr. Mann to say they are dead, I'd give higher weight to more "independent" opinions. For example, while one can register .shop domains on Godaddy (if searched directly for some-term.shop), they would NOT offer such an alternative if "some-term" with no extention is searched. They would offer "some-term.store" variant though, at least for my IP-country. So, what makes GD think that .store is better (vs .shop)? And of course .xyz is right there in offers list.
If GD bothered to comment, this would be interesting

I really like new cheap gtlds in fact So many spam with these new extensions that are given away for $0.99 or so - which builds even less value in enduser eyes

 

[Kate]

Also, Google is obviously pro nGTLD's and they making a point of using them... they are pushing for people to become more comfortable with seeing nGTLD's ...

Yet we can see that little progress has been made in 3 years. Remember what they said on NP a while back ?
"In 3-5 years new extensions will be mainstream"
"The floodgates are open"
"Unprecedented choice"
"Revolution"
"Backed by heavyweights" (so what ? .mobi was 'backed' too)
"It's the end of .com"

Keep in mind that both Rick Schwartz and Mike have a vested interest in knocking nGTLD's as they are both heavily invested in their .com portfolios.

I don't think that end users are listening to MM or even know him. They have figured out for themselves what they want to use for their business ventures.
IMO those who say that are precisely those who are heavily invested in new TLDs, and they are looking for validation of their choices because they are feeling insecure (not without reason though).

maybe he is just not interested in $500 USD sales...

So making XXXX per month from .com is good but bad from new gTLDs?

Seriously, I don't get it at all.

The problem with new extensions:

• they are harder to sell than .com, so the risk of no sale is high
• they often carry more expensive fees, so the costs of holding a portfolio quickly add up and eats at your bottom line.

Where I live (Europe), ccTLDs are dominant. So the .com vs new gTLDs debate doesn't even make sense. People are ignoring new extensions.

 

[deez007]

I don't think that end users are listening to MM or even know him. They have figured out for themselves what they want to use for their business ventures.
IMO those who say that are precisely those who are heavily invested in new TLDs, and they are looking for validation of their choices because they are feeling insecure (not without reason though).

Thats the thing though, I am not heavily invested in n TLD's ...I do own a fair amount of them but not all heavily invested, I own more .com and ccTLD's so I am not biased to new TLD's. I simply see the value in them. Has the uptake been huge no, not as quickly as many expected...a slow start does not at all imply something is destined to fail. Bitcoin took a good few years to gain momentum... and investment "guru's" like Warren Buffet said it will NEVER take off, it will fail and people should be weary of investing in it. ... he is just one of the many financial and investment gurus who said bitcoin was waste of time...

 

[Fancy.domains]

they are harder to sell than .com, so the risk of no sale is high

Not for me and obviously not for a few other guys in this thread.

Where I live (Europe), ccTLDs are dominant. So the .com vs new gTLDs debate doesn't even make sense. People are ignoring new extensions.

I am not 100% sure, but I truly think that I have sold more new gTLDs to Europeans, than to Americans and Asians combined.

I agree that ccTLDs are popular in Europe. I used to have a portfolio with mainly ccTLDs before.

 

[urlurl]

i think the new gtld's are only good for shorteners. ie; i have *****Club.com so i picked up *****.club

 

[frank-germany]

Personally, I think .club is great for clubs, just as .org is great for organizations and so on.

so then .name is great for names and .mobi is great for mobile webpages and .tel is great for businesscard type websites

but it is not !!

 

[frank-germany]

It is of course always interesting to read opinions of industry veterans, like Mike Mann or Frank Schilling, on different business aspects. In this particular case, however, one can imagine some "parallel universe" where mr. Mann founded one or more new-gtld registries, while mr. Schilling did not. They both would say exactly the opposite. Since in our universe it is natural for mr. Schilling to support new gtlds and for mr. Mann to say they are dead, I'd give higher weight to more "independent" opinions. For example, while one can register .shop domains on Godaddy (if searched directly for some-term.shop), they would NOT offer such an alternative if "some-term" with no extention is searched. They would offer "some-term.store" variant though, at least for my IP-country. So, what makes GD think that .store is better (vs .shop)? And of course .xyz is right there in offers list.
If GD bothered to comment, this would be interesting

I really like new cheap gtlds in fact So many spam with these new extensions that are given away for $0.99 or so - which builds even less value in enduser eyes

Mr Schilling, Mr Mann and Mr Schwartz

all of them are equaly able to register new tlds
as much as youn and me

so I think your argument is weak

 

[frank-germany]

if you would own "theIndiaStory.com" if you would have thought that this is a good domain
would you have priced it at $ 5K USD ????

Mike did and sold today

I want to learn rather from Mike then from you

 

[S-B]

if you would own "theIndiaStory.com" if you would have thought that this is a good domain
would you have priced it at $ 5K USD ????

Mike did and sold today

I want to learn rather from Mike then from you

That doesn't mean that he is smart. It just means the buyer was not smart.

 

[frank-germany]

That doesn't mean that he is smart. It just means the buyer was not smart.

come on

why can't you let him be smart?
it won't hurt you

 

[lennco]

That doesn't mean that he is smart. It just means the buyer was not smart.

Mann was smart enough to find a Not-So Smart buyer.

 

[elevator]

Don't you know what ever a leading guy on sales always make sense to multitude and not because they are not smart. The world tends to listening to reach people rather than average person, simply, that is why he is able to sell "theIndiaStory.com" for such a price and many other domains that are less quality for premium price.