.mobi .mobi Doing Much Better Than Expected

[jmcc]

I was looking at the stats for the .mobi zonefile this morning and the count was 867629. The landrush anniversary count was 959154. The difference in registration volume is 91525 domains. The volume of domains in the zone is only off by 9.54%. The Landrush anniversary was 26 September 2008 and as such the landrush in many of the newer TLDs tends to last approximately three months. During these three months the number of new registrations surges. After this initial period, the registration numbers begin to fall off.

I posted an article about this on my blog [1] but this post just summarises it. The number of domains that have dropped out of the zonefile since the landrush anniversary is 154006 but in the same time, 62481 new domains have been seen. This is lessening the effect of the Junk Dump phase when the stuff that could not be sold is dropped. Far from being a wipeout, there is still life left in .mobi.

Regards...jmcc
[1] http://blog.whoisireland.com/2008/12/31/mobi-registrations-doing-much-better-than-expected/

 

[Jeff]

Anyone who hasn't figured out by now that mTLD is in the developer business and not the domainer business hasn't been paying attention. Ready.mobi, DeviceAtlas, Site.mobi - but not a parking program in sight. They've voted with their salaries where they want the focus to go -- to a developed .mobi namespace.

The .mobi owners who learned to develop or paid developers are the ones who are going to prosper in the long run. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

what naysayers seem to not understand, is that .mobi is a developers extension.

I don't understand ... if the ".MOBI" is for developers and development, how can enthusiasts and various supporters here now seemingly have no problem with "redirected" ".MOBI" domains? :red:
IYHO's.

I noticed that godaddy.mobi redirects to godaddymobile.com . It seems that GoDaddy doesn't like the .mobi name enough to use it.

Same with Bank of America and countless other corporate "redirects" ... combine these "redirects" (lack of stand-alone development (see above) and lack of developed namespace/"ecosystem") with the most recent Zone Files (update 840,288 and falling ... ), and most notably, ".MOBI" prices off by 89% - 95%+ - in which we can clearly see that the extension is not nearly doing as well as expected, IMHO.

Please discuss.
-Jeff

 

[mjnels]

man you are really digging in the thread graveyard now...

 

[Jeff]

I updated the pertinent Zone Files, and added my humble comments (specifically, the recent acceptance of "redirects" vs. development) on the topic here IMHO. :gl:

See you soon.
-Jeff

 

[Traveler]

Same with Bank of America and countless other corporate "redirects" ...

So what you are saying is, there have been so many corporations that have purchased their .mobi and taken the time to redirect it to a mobile version of their site that the number cannot even be counted?

That is bad for .mobi how?

As far as stand alone development there is plenty of that if you take the time to look.

I spent about two minutes with google and found these (and a bunch of others) that don't redirect and are stand alone.

helsinki.mobi
ericsson.mobi
weather.mobi
vodafone.mobi
timesmobile.mobi
oneindia.mobi
banff.mobi
thn.mobi
thesun.mobi
chase.mobi

Some pretty big names in there. Of course if you want more examples, may I suggest http://google.com

 

[Jeff]

That is bad for .mobi how?

As I mentioned above, in the context of mTLD being in the "developer business" and that the ".MOBI is a developer's extension" ... I don't see exactly how this can be consistent or justified with easy and simple "redirects" IMHO.
Thank you for the clarification.

As far as stand alone development there is plenty of that if you take the time to look.

I am specifically looking for major corporate .MOBI's that have stand-alone development and don't "redirect", and that are also indexed in the SE's (namely, in Google's "Classic" search from one's cool iPhone™) ... so I greatly appreciate the provided .MOBI's and I will go through / review each of them and then add to the Master List™ in the other thread, if appropriate IMHO. :gl:

You're correct, I am not looking for redirected ".MOBI" domain names! :gl:
Regards.
-Jeff

 

[Traveler]

As I mentioned above, in the context of mTLD being in the "developer business" and that the ".MOBI is a developer's extension" ... I don't see exactly how this can be consistent or justified with easy and simple "redirects" IMHO.
Thank you for the clarification.

I'm not part of the .mobi is a developers extension logic, but I can't see how having countless corporations purchase their .mobi and redirect it to their mobile site could be bad for the extension. If they were pure defensive regs they would not even bother to set up a redirect and in that case would be no help to the extension.

Take the classic bofa.mobi example, that is clearly not a defensive reg. Also if you search "mobi" in google you will find them on one of the first few pages and the url that is displayed is bofa.mobi.

Don't forget to add zagat.mobi to your list if you have not already (linky please). They won a 2008 webby for that site and they are not shy about telling you so from their .com site.

 

[Jeff]

As I mentioned above, in the context of mTLD being in the "developer business" and that the ".MOBI is a developer's extension" ... I don't see exactly how this can be consistent or justified with easy and simple "redirects" IMHO.
Thank you for the clarification.

I'm not part of the .mobi is a developers extension logic, but I can't see how having countless corporations purchase their .mobi and redirect it to their mobile site could be bad for the extension. If they were pure defensive regs they would not even bother to set up a redirect and the would not help the extension.

Take the classic bofa.mobi example, that is clearly not a defensive reg. Also if you search "mobi" in google you will find them on one of the first few pages and the url that is displayed is bofa.mobi.

Don't forget to add zagat.mobi to your list if you have not already (linky please). They won a 2008 webby for that site and they are not shy about telling you so from their .com site.

:hi:

I don't understand how you're not part of the .MOBI is a developer's extension logic ... it has clearly been established as such here in this thread by proponents of the ".MOBI". All these domains being redirected ... does not substantively add to the stand-alone developed .MOBI "ecosystem", IMHO. :red:

Certainly, you're not saying it's a redirector's extension? :o

PS. It took me all of two seconds to find the following in Google: :lala:

chase.com/mobile
weather.com/mobile
bankofamerica.com/mobile
mobile.zagat.com

:blink:

-Jeff

Added (one more second at Google):
superpages.com/mobile
mobile.ericsson.com

:talk:

 

[Traveler]

I don't understand how you're not part of the .MOBI is a developer's extension logic ...

Just so we are on the same page, I'm all for development no matter what the extension. I just don't see how .mobi is a developer extension more so than others. Unless you have some uber names that get type in traffic in whatever extension, you pretty much have to dev if you want to see traffic. Either that or drop some coin in to advertising like Fox News, Bofa, or Disney.

Certainly, you're not saying it's a redirector's extension? :o

That does not even deserve a response.

PS. It took me all of two seconds to find the following in Google: :lala:

chase.com/mobile
weather.com/mobile
bankofamerica.com/mobile
mobile.zagat.com

:blink:

-Jeff

2 seconds huh? You are getting slow in your old age.

If you go to to Zagat.com, they promote zagat.mobi on their site not mobile.zagat.com

http://www.zagat.com/Content.aspx?PrimNav=Mob&CT=pageBody_Mobile

If you go to bankofamerica.com they promote their bofa.mobi not bankofamerica.com/mobile

http://www.bankofamerica.com/onlinebanking/mobilebanking/flash/index.cfm

If you go to weather.com they promote weather.mobi not weather.com/mobile

http://www.weather.com/mobile/dotmobi.html

As far as chase, I could not find any link on their homepage regarding how to access the mobile version of their site.

 

[Jeff]

Either that or drop some coin in to advertising like Fox News, Bofa, or Disney.

It's simply not going to stick, my friend ... unless it's backed up with both stand-alone developments -and- firm compliance (on the respective ".MOBI's" and by mTLD), IMHO.

That does not even deserve a response.

Fair enough, my apologies ... with further evidence of actual, meaningful stand-alone developments I will retract my "it's certainly not a redirector's extension" comment/question. :gl: :imho:

If you go to to Zagat.com, they promote zagat.mobi on their site not mobile.zagat.com

If you go to bankofamerica.com they promote their bofa.mobi not bankofamerica.com/mobile

If you go to weather.com they promote weather.mobi not weather.com/mobile

As far as chase, I could not find any link on their homepage regarding how to access the mobile version of their site.

^ Good stuff (Zagat and Weather), but not enough for them to not also be promoting other mobile variations both on their respective websites, and other online and offline marketings ... as a whole ... and in the (this is the key) important Search Engines - it seems to me that there are some companies experimenting with different mobile pages ... and the respective ".MOBI's" are still not the standard by any stretch of the imagination, IMHO.
In few cases, they are an option at this time ... and for those only being redirected, perhaps even a very short-term option as more and more people acquire iPhones and other smart devices (that don't want the "watered-down" version(s))?

Which also begs the question ... after 2 1/2+ years, why is the ".MOBI" not the standard (and why are other perfectly viable mobile options so easily prevalent - indexed and ranked - in the SE's)? :blink:

-Jeff

 

[Traveler]

Which also begs the question ... after 2 1/2+ years, why is the ".MOBI" not the standard (and why are other perfectly viable mobile options so easily prevalent - indexed and ranked - in the SE's)? :blink:

-Jeff

I guess you could ask the same question as to why m.sitename.com or sitename.com/mobile or wap.sitename.com or sitename.com/wap has not become the standard.

On a side note, if you were expecting the .mobi to become "the standard" for the mobile web, your expectations were far greater than mine :o

 

[Jeff]

I guess you could ask the same question as to why m.sitename.com or sitename.com/mobile or wap.sitename.com or sitename.com/wap has not become the standard.

Agreed ... there is no clear "standard", and I feel that part of the answer may lie in the fact that NONE of these (mobile) options may even be needed in the not-too-distant future (again, due to advances such as iPhone™ and other smart devices, as well as emerging browser and auto-detection technologies and their capacities, etc.), IMHO. :gl:

Good discussion, thanks much! :talk:
-Jeff

 

[Traveler]

Agreed ... there is no "standard", and I feel that part of the answer may lie in the fact that NONE of these options may be needed in the not-too-distant future (again, due to advances such as iPhones™ and other smart devices, as well as browser and auto-detection technologies and capacities, etc.), IMHO. :gl:

Maybe, but I think what you see as a "watered down" version, I see as optimized. The iphone is very cool, and is probably the best option for a user trying to view a full size webpage on a handheld device. However, that is not a web experience I want to have for websites I visit on a daily basis. Looking outside the .mobi box, there certainly does seem to be a big push to provide information formatted for smaller screens. While future technology may render all of this effort useless, realistically there is nothing on the horizon that I am aware of that is remotely close to mass production.

 

[Jeff]

Time will tell, indeed ... but I don't think time is exactly on the side of mTLD and the ".MOBI" IMHO.

See you soon.
-Jeff

 

[mjnels]

Agreed ... there is no clear "standard", and I feel that part of the answer may lie in the fact that NONE of these (mobile) options may even be needed in the not-too-distant future (again, due to advances such as iPhone™ and other smart devices, as well as emerging browser and auto-detection technologies and their capacities, etc.), IMHO. :gl:

this is certainly not the trend... when the iPhone came out there was suddenly an explosion of new "mobile sites"...

see, you are no longer debating .MOBI - you're debating whether "mobile sites" are a good idea or not since things like the iPhone exist.. and again, this type of thinking is so far removed from what is really happening right now that i am truly dumbfounded reading these kind of posts from someone who claims to have been following the mobile/.mobi situation since 2006.

 

[Jeff]

this is certainly not the trend... when the iPhone came out there was suddenly an explosion of new "mobile sites"...

You're not following the discussion ... I don't know of any "explosion" of mobile websites at the time, but I do know that the emergence of the iPhone™ created additional awareness - the fact that there is still no clear standard, and why there are other perfectly viable mobile options (other than the ".MOBI") so easily prevalent - indexed and ranked - in the SE's is right on the topic of the .MOBI and, specifically, how it's not doing as well as expected (also given the statistics of the sales prices and Zone Files, as well), IMHO. :yell:

-Jeff

 

[mjnels]

I am following the discussion.. you're trying to weasel your way out of what you said... let me remind you:

I feel that part of the answer may lie in the fact that NONE of these (mobile) options may even be needed in the not-too-distant future (again, due to advances such as iPhone™ and other smart devices, as well as emerging browser and auto-detection technologies and their capacities, etc.)

you seem to think the iPhone has such a huge screen - as if it were a laptop computer or something... this is not the case. this is also one reason why Mobile Apps are so popular on the iPhone/Blackberry/etc. - because they are designed for the screen size.... same concept behind websites designed for mobile.

I know you've previously said you only own a crappy LG mobile phone or something and that you dont even really visit websites on it... this leads me to believe you are just assuming everything about the iPhone (and similar devices) and relying on hearsay for some of the simplest things. that's originally why i said this type of thinking, if you are truly being sincere, is very endearing.

 

[Jeff]

I am following the discussion.. you're trying to weasel your way out of what you said...

You cleverly and intentionally ommitted the first part of what I had said in that referenced quote (in response to something totally unrelated to your context) ... pertaining specifically to "there is no clear "standard", but it makes no difference here for our discussion (you've got something here on your mind and you obviously feel the need to share it, regardless of the actual topic)! :talk:
It's cool, IMHO.

you seem to think the iPhone has such a huge screen - as if it were a laptop computer or something... this is not the case. this is also one reason why Mobile Apps are so popular on the iPhone/Blackberry/etc. - because they are designed for the screen size.... same concept behind websites designed for mobile.

I know you've previously said you only own a crappy LG mobile phone or something and that you dont even really visit websites on it... this leads me to believe you are just assuming everything about the iPhone (and similar devices) and relying on hearsay for some of the simplest things. that's originally why i said this type of thinking, if you are truly being sincere, is very endearing.

What does any of this have to do with the specific topical points of:

The fact that there is still no clear standard, and why there are other perfectly viable mobile options (other than the ".MOBI") so easily prevalent - indexed and ranked - in the SE's is right on the topic of the .MOBI and, specifically, how it's not doing as well as expected (also given the statistics of the sales prices and Zone Files, as well), IMHO.

PS. I have a super cool iPhone™ in my hand ... at this very moment, friend. :talk:
Hint: If you have access to one, please check out websites in landscape mode, as well as Google in its "Classic" version!
-Jeff

 

[mjnels]

no.

everyone can easily scroll up and see what was said.... it is kind of a problem you will never concede anything.

i've owned an iphone since 2007 when it came out... i've been super cool for a while now sir.

 

[Traveler]

PS. I have a super cool iPhone™ in my hand ... at this very moment, friend. :talk:
Hint: If you have access to one, please check out websites in landscape mode, as well as Google in its "Classic" version!
-Jeff

Hey jeff, since you have a super cool iphone in your hand, hopefully in landscape mode. Can you actually read all the text on a page like bbc news or yahoo? I sure can't without zooming in.

"Waiter, there is a fly in my soup." :wave:

 

[Jeff]

^ Narly flys! :o

Sorry for the delay, I was sort of at the mercy of my friend who was here with me for a bit ... and she was on the phone talking with her Mom at the time of your earlier post - yes, there was some simple "zooming" while on some pages in the "landscape" mode ... but these were very simple finger taps / double taps and I didn't experience any problems or delays, IMHO. :gl:
My friend had to take off, and I guess you can also scroll and drag and do other neat things ... but I can't imagine any mobile device much more intuitive than the super cool iPhone™! :music: :talk:

-Jeff