.mobi .mobi dead or .mobi on NP dead ?

[tony_np]

I visited here every day.But seems no more news here.

.mobi dead or .mobi on NP dead ?

 

[exponent]

Large companies are picking up .mobi domains. Prices are down because people like Rick Schwartz went out and paid $200,000 for something like Flowers.mobi a few years back. Outrageous prices right off the bat lead to declining prices later on.

 

[snoop]

The .mobi market has crashed as you say and reality turned out to be nothing like expectations. Personally I think it will just end out being an alt extension for sites that are purely mobile only, that is a niche market. Would compare it to something like .info or .tv. If you are going to invest make sure it is with gambling money.

 

[noonoo1]

I read the .mobi prices are down 89% in one year and that made me think 'how long live .mobi'. I have a number of .mobi names and this news feared me about it's future.

I ask .mobi purchase or not?

Thanks.

Fast Action Domains

It's really bad out there and I'm going to let all mine drop.

























NOT!

Hang on in there, this is just like 2001, people were letting generic .com names drop or sell for like $50, 75, 100 dollars, 6 years later going fo $$,$$$

Dont listen to any negative hype.
I am getting .mobi google adds on my minisites when looking at them through my iPhone.
The value of a domain name is the adverts it attracts and the money that is made from them.

 

[dotcomisdead]

Would the Mods care to close this thread and link it to the established thread regarding the age old question "is mobi dead or just dead on NP?"

Otherwise it just looks like trolling..

Many Thanks in advance...

Toodle Pip

---------- Post added at 11:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 AM ----------

The .mobi market has crashed as you say and reality turned out to be nothing like expectations. Personally I think it will just end out being an alt extension for sites that are purely mobile only, that is a niche market. Would compare it to something like .info or .tv. If you are going to invest make sure it is with gambling money.

What a surprise to see your comments on this thread Mr Snoopy.... you really should apply for a Government grant for all the 'voluntary public service' work you do in the interests of vulnerable individuals who might otherwise waste all their money on dotmobi's...

Of course, you are quite right... sites that are made for mobile only are going to be a complete failure - the way things are headed, (say 2012 - 2015) there could be as few as 4 Billion people with access to the internet from their mobile phones...

Compare that the 1 or maybe 2 billion people who have the luxury of a pc or laptop and it's a no-brainer really.....

Although I think my understanding of what a 'no-brainer' is, in this context, somewhat different to the way I'd usually use the term... lol

I have just sold a reg-fee 3 word dotmobi today for $500.00 - there must be some right idiots out there with money to burn eh?

I think I might go and spend some of that on a few domains... dotmobi's of course! :bingo:

Toodle Pip

---------- Post added at 11:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 AM ----------

I read the .mobi prices are down 89% in one year and that made me think 'how long live .mobi'. I have a number of .mobi names and this news feared me about it's future.

I ask .mobi purchase or not?

Thanks.

Fast Action Domains

As you will see in my post above, there is another thread discussing this subject but I would be very careful about how you interpret figures...

I haven't seen any of my dotmobi investments fall by 89%.... 99% of mine are reg fee or bulk drops at $6 to $10 each...

The price drops are only seen in 'real' sales that have been domainer trades... if someone pays $10,000 for a premium domain in immature extension and then needs to cash out for persoanl reasons, if the onward sale is for $2,000 to another domainer, does that tell you about the true value of the domain or just the state of the domainer to domainer market?

Warren Buffet buys value... he ignores the market and focuses on the value... it's not so easy to do when it means going against the herd... but boy! Is the herd ever wrong? you tell me.....

If you have domains and you have some spare cash for investment, I would always suggest that you add a few good dotmobis to your portfolio... don't buy crap domains (in any extension) or you'll lose the money..

GE Credit have just picked up mycreditcard.mobi.... it's not a domain that you'd immediately attach to a multi-national but that's what is so exciting about dotmobi... the rules aren't the same... & I'm loving the breath of fresh air!

If it's not for you, just go with your instinct and stay out of the market.. either way, whatever you do is unlikely to kill you!

 

[scandiman]

Would the Mods care to close this thread and link it to the established thread regarding the age old question "is mobi dead or just dead on NP?"

:bingo::bingo::bingo:

 

[snoop]

Of course, you are quite right... sites that are made for mobile only are going to be a complete failure

Not sure whaere you get this stuff from as I have never made any claim like that.

---------- Post added at 05:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:28 PM ----------

does that tell you about the true value of the domain or just the state of the domainer to domainer market?

Probably both.

Warren Buffet buys value... he ignores the market and focuses on the value... it's not so easy to do when it means going against the herd... but boy! Is the herd ever wrong? you tell me.....

Wake me up when Warren Buffet starts speculating on investments that produce no revenue. You aren't Warren Buffet, I'm not Warren Buffet, so lets put to sleep all these meaningless comparisons and see the market for what it is is, *values* - what .mobi domains are actually worth, have fallen 90%-100%.

 

[-REECE-]

Good advice imho. Nothing wrong with it being an alt extension -- just means that if you want to make money through .mobi, you'll have to do it through development instead of domaining.

The .mobi market has crashed as you say and reality turned out to be nothing like expectations. Personally I think it will just end out being an alt extension for sites that are purely mobile only, that is a niche market. Would compare it to something like .info or .tv. If you are going to invest make sure it is with gambling money.

Threads have been merged as requested.

 

[labrocca]

labrocca, you obviously know nothing about the print business due to your comments made previously.

I know enough that for 2 years I published my own magazine. Don't assume what I know. I have lots of experience in different fields. You're just going off on a tangent about print. It's for the most part unrelated to this discussion.

The game is changing but it's still basically the same.

I still stand by that statement firmly.

 

[scandiman]

The .mobi market has crashed as you say and reality turned out to be nothing like expectations.

What do you know about my or anyone else's expectations? These blanket categorizations are where things get derailed. Some people view any new TLD as a lottory ticket (typo intended for the enjoyment of those who remember), but I know for a fact that myself and many other .mobi enthusiasts were quite realistic about what it was going to take for .mobi to have a solid market position.

 

[newton]

Would the Mods care to close this thread and link it to the established thread regarding the age old question "is mobi dead or just dead on NP?"

:tu:

 

[meegwell]

apps vs. web in mobile world

apps vs. web in mobile world

being someone who was a regular user of the bulletin boards (that would be monochrome BBS systems powered by the likes of wildcat) prior to the more robust WWW, here is my brief take on mobile apps:

After BBS, I graduated to Prodigy, then onto Compuserve, and after a brief stint with AOL I realized we don't need these constricting places that act like walls to make sure the stupid user doesn't get lost. They were all hand-holding apps essentially (if not technically). In the days of Prodigy and Compuserve, the content on the open web was far from mainstream so outside of niche hobby uber-geek stuff most folks were better off in those cages.

My crystal ball says that eventually anything you can do in an app you will be able to do on a mobile-dedicated website. We are already seeing the growth of web->device->location integration. Your phone won't be bogged down with all these resource hungry apps, just a good browser. People will become comfortable finding and using these browser-based mobile tools (aka "mobile specific websites")...as well as p*rn...and all these apps will go the way of aol, prodigy, and compuserve.:ghost: boo!


...meegwell

 

[dotcomisdead]

Good advice imho. Nothing wrong with it being an alt extension -- just means that if you want to make money through .mobi, you'll have to do it through development instead of domaining.



Threads have been merged as requested.

Thanks for merging threads Reece, I think that was the right thing to do.....

.mobi for development not domaining?

That depends on whether you buy a domain on monday to sell it on friday (which is what seems to constitute domaining around here)?
Or... if you buy a domain in 2009 to sell it in 2011 or 2015 even... (strategy a la Rick :bingo

For true buy & hold potential I don't think you can beat dotmobi.... but obviously everyone should make their own mind up... because as we all know from the collective wisdom on this forum; the mobile internet using dotmobi is finished.... a dead duck, kicked the bucket just like the famous Parrot!

Oh... almost forgot;

Porn straining mobile networks

Just a little reminder that mobile internet isn't the same as when you sit at your desk... the data flow is very important! Yes the technology will improve and yes, the data flow will increase but the growth in user numbers will ensure that bandwidth is constantly under pressure - in a year or two the bandwith will increase by factor x but traffic will increase by factor x+ (IMHO) so this means that mobile compliant sites will always load faster, be less likely to crash etc etc... :bingo:


Toodle Pip

 

[mjnels]

apps vs. web in mobile world

being someone who was a regular user of the bulletin boards (that would be monochrome BBS systems powered by the likes of wildcat) prior to the more robust WWW, here is my brief take on mobile apps:

After BBS, I graduated to Prodigy, then onto Compuserve, and after a brief stint with AOL I realized we don't need these constricting places that act like walls to make sure the stupid user doesn't get lost. They were all hand-holding apps essentially (if not technically). In the days of Prodigy and Compuserve, the content on the open web was far from mainstream so outside of niche hobby uber-geek stuff most folks were better off in those cages.

My crystal ball says that eventually anything you can do in an app you will be able to do on a mobile-dedicated website. We are already seeing the growth of web->device->location integration. Your phone won't be bogged down with all these resource hungry apps, just a good browser. People will become comfortable finding and using these browser-based mobile tools (aka "mobile specific websites")...as well as p*rn...and all these apps will go the way of aol, prodigy, and compuserve.:ghost: boo!


...meegwell

very well summed up. although i think apps will always be around and still play a part in the world of mobile devices...but its getting to the point where there is an app for everything... a bit of "app overbuilding" happening right now i think. one major benefit of apps though, is you dont have to have an internet connection to get access to it.. comes in handy during the time we're still living in when often there is intermittent internet reception.

 

[meegwell]

very well summed up. although i think apps will always be around and still play a part in the world of mobile devices...but its getting to the point where there is an app for everything... a bit of "app overbuilding" happening right now i think. one major benefit of apps though, is you dont have to have an internet connection to get access to it.. comes in handy during the time we're still living in when often there is intermittent internet reception.

good point. let me correct that last line: many of these apps will go the way of...

 

[dotcomisdead]

Very well summed up. although i think apps will always be around and still play a part in the world of mobile devices...but its getting to the point where there is an app for everything... a bit of "app overbuilding" happening right now i think. one major benefit of apps though, is you dont have to have an internet connection to get access to it.. comes in handy during the time we're still living in when often there is intermittent internet reception.

You do raise a very basic point; Apps don't require internet access.... or to paraphrase; Apps are not the internet!

Whereas, mobile sites are!

 

[acc]

Wake me up when Warren Buffet starts speculating on investments that produce no revenue. You aren't Warren Buffet, I'm not Warren Buffet, so lets put to sleep all these meaningless comparisons and see the market for what it is is, *values* - what .mobi domains are actually worth, have fallen 90%-100%.

Plenty of real world investors in many different industries speculate on investments that pay off over time. Stocks, land, mining, etc. Some require some kind of "development". (Buffet on the very conservative side of the investing spectrum. - - But he too will buy assets to hold - expecting those companies' efforts or market segment improvement to pay off in the long term.) I'm not saying that .mobi = those other investments. I AM saying though that investing in domains that some people do not like or understand CAN provide profits. Profits can be gained over the HOLDER's time period - not on that of casual observers or armchair quarterbacks.

Snoop - you generalized earlier in this thread that .mobi investments can not pay for themselves or domainers can not make money with it. You are wrong. I gave a quick concrete example earlier in this thread. You asked for examples to my claim that .mobi sales can cover reg fees. I showed how just three actual 2009 sales whose $x,xxx revenue cover renewal fees for 900 names.(BTW - Those three names were landrush regs that required one renewal each. Is that the cost side of the equation you were looking for? I mistakenly assumed that it would be understood in my initial argument.)

What's fallen 90%-100% ... hmm .... look at these recent examples posted at another forum frequented by someone coincidentally (?) named "snoopy" ...

>>OnlineFinancing _ com
Bought: Feb 2008 Traffic - $17,500
Allowed to EXPIRE !!! in 2009 - $0.00
(& then auctioned and sold for $4,805)
That's a 100% LOSS taken on a DOT COM by a "seasoned" domainer.

>>CentralAmerica _ net:
Bought: February 2008 TRAFFIC auction - $12,000
Sold: June 2009 - NameJet - $3,433.

>>Snowmobiles _ net
Bought: February 2008 - TRAFFIC auction - $17,000
Sold June 2009 - NameJet - $3,433

>>HighSpeed _ net
Bought: 2007 T.R.A.F.F.I.C. Silicon Valley - $27,000
Sold: 2009 Moniker sale - $1,500
HUGE LOSS on a .net

...Here's what that someone named "snoopy" posted at another forum about that last one:
"...Then again the .net market overall has had a very major fall. 95% loss after fees for this one."


OUCH !!! - HUGE DOLLAR LOSSES all on those "top-extension" domains bought at the TRAFFIC domainer conferences - (you know - "by invitation only" events where maybe the "top" 1% +/- of "experienced" domainers go to schmooze, make deals, and enjoy the fruits of their labors. Evidently even "experts" can often get it wrong - and BIGTIME. But maybe that's okay because those investments were made on domains in "top" extensions.


Fact is - MASSIVE domainer DOLLARS are being LOST due to selling off (dumping) .com/.net/.org names TOO.
.
Fact is - MORE money is LOST/WASTED on dropped names each MONTH than is spent on ALL the .mobi regs for an entire YEAR. Seems to me that's 100% losses on all those .com/.net/.org regs by domainers EVERY year.
.

.

 

[labrocca]

acc you're highlighting a handful of failures and ignoring the many success stories of CNO.

Why not really counter the argument of mobi having low value with some top mobi sales that are recent.

You can't compare the handful of mobi successes vs the handful of CNO failures. I ain't gonna buy into that argument.

DNJournal.com Year to Date Domain Sales Charts

Stats don't lie.

VIP.mobi $10,099 Sedo 3/15/09

That's it for mobi. One lousy sale in 7 months.

You continue to bring in fairy tale math and speculation while completely ignoring any current and recent history. I wish you luck with those blinders you have on.

Fact is - MORE money is LOST/WASTED on dropped names each MONTH than is spent on ALL the .mobi regs for an entire YEAR.

Fact is - MORE money is earned on sold names each MONTH than is spent on ALL the .mobi regs for the entire YEAR.

 

[snoop]

Snoop - you generalized earlier in this thread that .mobi investments can not pay for themselves or domainers can not make money with it. You are wrong. I gave a quick concrete example earlier in this thread. You asked for examples to my claim that .mobi sales can cover reg fees. I showed how just three actual 2009 sales whose $x,xxx revenue cover renewal fees for 900 names.(BTW - Those three names were landrush regs that required one renewal each. Is that the cost side of the equation you were looking for? I mistakenly assumed that it would be understood in my initial argument.)

Like I said a week or so ago let's talk real numbers,

-what have you spent on renewal fees
-what have you made from sales

Why is it so hard for people to just be clear on whether they have made money or not? It doesn't matter whether your sales could cover 900 registrations, have you made money? One think I know is the vast majority of domainers have lost money on .mobi (I know of one person who has made a profit on .mobi - mjnels), the failure rate has been much higher than established extensions.

What's fallen 90%-100% ... hmm .... look at these recent examples posted at another forum frequented by someone coincidentally (?) named "snoopy" ...

.............

...Here's what that someone named "snoopy" posted at another forum about that last one:
"...Then again the .net market overall has had a very major fall. 95% loss after fees for this one."


OUCH !!! - HUGE DOLLAR LOSSES all on those "top-extension" domains bought at the TRAFFIC domainer conferences - (you know - "by invitation only" events where maybe the "top" 1% +/- of "experienced" domainers go to schmooze, make deals, and enjoy the fruits of their labors. Evidently even "experts" can often get it wrong - and BIGTIME. But maybe that's okay because those investments were made on domains in "top" extensions.


Fact is - MASSIVE domainer DOLLARS are being LOST due to selling off (dumping) .com/.net/.org names TOO.
.
Fact is - MORE money is LOST/WASTED on dropped names each MONTH than is spent on ALL the .mobi regs for an entire YEAR. Seems to me that's 100% losses on all those .com/.net/.org regs by domainers EVERY year.
.

.

I think premium .com's are generally down about 50% as an average, .net maybe 70-80% as an average. That is still miles better than how .mobi has performed. I don't see .net as a "top extension". It is half way between .mobi and .com. Mediocre might be a better word.

 

[kemjika11]

I think premium .com's are generally down about 50% as an average, .net maybe 70-80% as an average. That is still miles better than how .mobi has performed. I don't see .net as a "top extension". It is half way between .mobi and .com. Mediocre might be a better word.

You make a good point supporting why .mobi is still struggling. on the other hand, i disagree .net is not a top extension. THe numbers prove it is a top extension. It has a large alternative appeal in the world despite what domainers think of it.

.mobi....lol....i can tell you, this is already one of the best threads on NP this year.

 

[mediaadvantages]

I know enough that for 2 years I published my own magazine. Don't assume what I know. I have lots of experience in different fields. You're just going off on a tangent about print. It's for the most part unrelated to this discussion.



I still stand by that statement firmly.

If its unrelated then maybe you shouldn't have been bringing it up. Your statement is false. I have spoken to with Management and board members of McClatchy and Tribune on this subject. I would say I have much more experience in this area and you are far from an expert in the media industry.