.mobi .MOBI Thoughts on .TEL?

[GF]

I'm curious to see what all of the .MOBI investors think about .TEL.

Do you think .TEL helps .MOBI? Do you think .TEL is a terrible extension that further proves that .MOBI is the way to go for Mobile Web?

What are your thoughts?

 

[u8l2]

.telephone is too much coin for a dns records place holder. you cant compare the two at all. one you can develop websites, the other you cant.

 

[Jeff]

you cant compare the two at all. one you can develop websites, the other you cant.

Hi Rob,
You can only compare them ... in that one is short, one syllable, memorable, highly brandable .TEL ... and intuitive ... and seems a really good fit for quick & easy access to vital contact information (as was mentioned here earlier) for those that are out and about while "on the go"! :talk:
And the other one is not and/or does not have those attributes, IMHO.

Definitely, as I concurred with Jason above ... it's beauty (beyone being short, one syllable, etc.) may be in that there is no development with the highly brandable .TEL :imho:

PS. I agree that $300/whack @Landrush ... is steep for most domainers! :yell:

Thanks and hope all is well!
-Jeff

 

[Work In Progress]

I consider myself very open minded and a somewhat outside of the box thinker.

I have looked at .tel for some time now. The conclusions I have made are as follows:

Incredibly high risk investment (speaking of landrush) with very narrow chance of profiting

Most traditional names will hold little if any value. My thoughts are the traditional "category killer" names that phone books list might have some value....if .tel were to take hold.


.tel "sites" (templated contact info) might be monetized if and when .tel becomes very known to John Q Public...add to this fact, to monetize a .tel will require tremendous salesmanship if your basing your model on selling links to someone who have never heard of it. Your chances of repeat visitors are really cut back as they'll only come to your site once in a blue moon (when they might happen to need the specific service you offer)


Very sketchy SE potential as well (will suffer greatly for lack of content)

Quite boring for visitors to look at. Not much incentive to come back. Might have worked out much better 5-10 years ago before mobile content came into play.

Might be OK for a vanity TLD (but not worth the landrush $$, IMHO)

To me, the risks FAR outweigh the potential rewards

Traditional domainers don't like (and won't like) .mobi. It's not a park and hold TLD

.mobi sites are hard to monetize. You have to work at them to get the rewards. BUT, you build content on them and people will return. And click ads and or order product(s) :blink: I don't mind the work associated with mobi. It's my belief that people "on the go" care more about content than syllables and .tel just can't serve that up....

 

[u8l2]

Hi Rob,
You can only compare them ... in that one is short, one syllable, memorable, highly brandable .TEL ... and intuitive ... and seems a really good fit for quick & easy access to vital contact information (as was mentioned here earlier) for those that are out and about while "on the go"! :talk:
And the other one is not and/or does not have those attributes, IMHO.

Definitely, as I concurred with Jason above ... it's beauty (beyone being short, one syllable, etc.) may be in that there is no development with the highly brandable .TEL :imho:

PS. I agree that $300/whack @Landrush ... is steep for most domainers! :yell:

Thanks and hope all is well!
-Jeff

Hi Jeff,
I agree .tel is brandable but with the price it is just out of my reach. We'll have to wait until general registrations start to see if the prices start to come down. I know there is potential if lets say cellphones used the .tel as a default for a phone book. After all it would like opening a yellow pages directory and only finding one listing for lawyers. $$$ to be made there without a doubt.
Rob

 

[Jeff]

Mark, Rob ... despite our sometimes differences ... I have great respect for your opinions, and all thoughts ".MOBI" (and ".TEL", or anything else up for discussion for that matter)! :yell: :imho:

You both make the points of the expense and risks of the $300/whack landrush costs for the highly brandable .TEL - and I concur wholeheartedly, IMHO. :gl:

There are also very valid issues here with regard to (lack of highly brandable .TEL) content and its effect on ranking within SE's, as well as the sort of 'balancing act' of brandability (length and memorability of the highly brandable .TEL) versus actual content / functionality (of the developed .MOBI) for those that are "on the go" ... and I'd like to conduct a little additional research (future mobile habits, technological advances, and even some input on the marketing side of things, if possible) and sleep on this tonight if I may (it's been a long day, in general) and comment further tom'w.

My gut post at this time, is that mTLD should have initially secured the more highly brandable .TEL (or some short, memorable equivalent) extension ... and immediately invoked its signature "trustmark" (through both STRICTLY enforced mandated developments and compliance) from the very beginning (as well as taking Telnic's lead in not hoarding 1,000's+/+ of domain names!) ... because, let's face it, further advances in technology and future mobile habits / demographics may one day render both TLD's obsolete (I'm thinking about folks out and about and "on the go" on their cool iPhones and other - future - smart devices+). :gl: :imho:
Again, just my two for discussion sense.

Thanks again and chat more soon.
-Jeff

 

[u8l2]

There are also very valid issues here with regard to (lack of highly brandable .TEL) content and its effect on ranking within SE's

I read the other .tel discussion post where telenic changed the nameserver to point to a high PR page. thus transfering the PR to the .tel site. the PR will correct after the next update, i think the correct term for it is False Pagerank. No one knows for sure how goog is going to rank .tel until sites get up and running for a few months. Although I can see it ranking .tel higher for keywords such as telephone.

My gut post at this time, is that mTLD should have initially secured the more highly brandable .TEL (or some short, memorable equivalent) extension

What i dont understand is why mtld's 1st requirement is for your .mobi to resolve at http://your.mobi thus eliminating the user having to input 3 w characters and a . and then they choose a 4 letter double syllable. Why wouldnt they have secured .mob and saved users typing another character? That would be my 1st choice. My 2nd choice would have been .tel for exactly the same reason.

and I'd like to conduct a little additional research (future mobile habits, technological advances, and even some input on the marketing side of things, if possible)

I helped launch a .mobi site exactly 3 weeks ago with an initial investment of $xxx.xx for content rights and php coding. Gross Revenue to date is $xxxx.xx. We actually made back our initial investment in the 1st week. No marketing has been done as the site is in beta. http://vizeos.mobi
I can tell you that 98% of my 1/4 million visitors a month come looking for girlie stuff. If they see an ad and click i make $$$ If they happen to own a credit card and they like what they see i make even more $$$.
Cheers Mate
Rob

 

[Jeff]

^ Warning: Adult content! :red:

Thanks for the input, and all the best Rob!
Cheers.
-Jeff

 

[vanex]

You can register .tel now for about $15.00 a year
Does it change your outlook for this TLD ?

 

[Pred]

You can register .tel now for about $15.00 a year
Does it change your outlook for this TLD ?

no
actually about $9 from name.com i think

worth getting your first name. my initials are free to reg, but not interested
it's my name or nothing :sold:

 

[Domain Jedi]

I sold the last of my DotMobi's for $3,xxx.xx in February so there must still be some viable demand for DotMobi even in these economic times.

As for DotTel, I just couldn't pull the trigger.

 

[Jeff]

Good discussion.

My gut post at this time, is that mTLD should have initially secured the more highly brandable .TEL (or some short, memorable equivalent) extension

What i dont understand is why mtld's 1st requirement is for your .mobi to resolve at http://your.mobi thus eliminating the user having to input 3 w characters and a . and then they choose a 4 letter double syllable. Why wouldnt they have secured .mob and saved users typing another character? That would be my 1st choice. My 2nd choice would have been .tel for exactly the same reason.

Cheers Mate
Rob

^ Cheers, Rob ... obviously, I entirely concur with you regarding mTLD originally selecting an more memorable and shorter equivalent, IMHO. :yell:
".MOB" has some negative connotations, so I think I see why that one was not secured ... but the highly brandable .TEL and, potentially, the new and super cool .WEB may have been better options, hindsight of course always being 20/20, IMHO. :blink:

PS. I'd be interested in seeing how many ".MOBI" folks invested in the highly brandable .TEL ... over the past couple days? :red: :talk:

I sold the last of my DotMobi's for $3,xxx.xx in February so there must still be some viable demand for DotMobi even in these economic times.

Congrats, can you share more details ... for instance, was it sold to a fellow ".MOBI" domainer?

Thanks much.
-Jeff

 

[GF]

PS. I'd be interested in seeing how many ".MOBI" folks invested in the highly brandable .TEL ... over the past couple days? :red: :talk:

*Disclaimer: I do not invest in .MOBI*
.TEL and .MOBI couldn't be more different, which is why domainers who have invested in .MOBI would invest in .TEL.

They are night and day. .MOBI can be developed. .TEL cannot.

A .TEL would be used as an online business card. .MOBI would be used as a fully-functional mobile website.

A .TEL would be used to send people to their .MOBI and .COM sites.

 

[Jeff]

.MOBI can be developed. .TEL cannot.

A .TEL would be used as an online business card. .MOBI would be used as a fully-functional mobile website.

A .TEL would be used to send people to their .MOBI and .COM sites.

^ I agree 100%, IMHO. :gl:

-Jeff

 

[000]

Why didn't mTLD choose .TEL instead of .MOBI?

1. For starters, the term "telephone" is outdated. Us 'youngsters' don't say "telephone" - we say "phone". This is pure fact, and I don't think many here could say that they are more of an authority on the matter than me, a 20 year old male. Why would you choose an outdated term for a new extension?

Do a search in Google Images for "telephone". This is what the term means to the younger crowd:

Talk about getting off on the wrong footing!


2. "Mobile" and "phone/telephone" can not be used interchangeably. Not all mobile web devices are phones, and not all phones are mobile web devices. Two different terms.

So, right there I have given more than enough reason NOT to use .TEL for a "mobile web"-related domain extension.

If anyone feels differently, I urge you to comment, and explain your reasoning.


What would have been a better extension name than ".MOBI"?

.tel - No, please see above explanation.

.mob - You must be joking. How does ".MOB" sound cool? Can you imagine any company wanting a .mob site? ESPN.mob? Google.mob? Sounds like some sort of gang. There are blatant issues with the negative connotations associated with the word "mob". So, no thanks. dotMob would have been a horrible choice.

.mo - No, this is already in use.

.m - Single-letter TLD's are not allowed (at least as far as I am aware?)

.dev - As in "device".... to me this screams "development". Also does not sound "cool"... think ESPN.dev, Google.dev... etc. Um, no thanks.

.mobi - Easily recognizable as meaning "mobile"... sounds cool (ESPN.mobi, Google.mobi)... rolls off the tongue nicely...

I'm sorry but I can't think of any better name options for the extension than ".mobi".

Please, if anyone else has other extension name ideas, let me know!

.TEL and .MOBI couldn't be more different, which is why domainers who have invested in .MOBI would invest in .TEL.

They are night and day. .MOBI can be developed. .TEL cannot.

A .TEL would be used as an online business card. .MOBI would be used as a fully-functional mobile website.

A .TEL would be used to send people to their .MOBI and .COM sites.

Exactly.... which is why I don't understand at all why Jeff is constantly bringing .TEL up in every .MOBI discussion?

Jeff, care to explain why you see .TEL and .MOBI as being so connected?

 

[Pred]

Why didn't mTLD choose .TEL instead of .MOBI?

1. For starters, the term "telephone" is outdated. Us 'youngsters' don't say "telephone" - we say "phone". This is pure fact, and I don't think many here could say that they are more of an authority on the matter than me, a 20 year old male. Why would you choose an outdated term for a new extension?

Do a search in Google Images for "telephone". This is what the term means to the younger crowd:

Talk about getting off on the wrong footing!


2. "Mobile" and "phone/telephone" can not be used interchangeably. Not all mobile web devices are phones, and not all phones are mobile web devices. Two different terms.

So, right there I have given more than enough reason NOT to use .TEL for a "mobile web"-related domain extension.

If anyone feels differently, I urge you to comment, and explain your reasoning.


What would have been a better extension name than ".MOBI"?

.tel - No, please see above explanation.

.mob - You must be joking. How does ".MOB" sound cool? Can you imagine any company wanting a .mob site? ESPN.mob? Google.mob? Sounds like some sort of gang. There are blatant issues with the negative connotations associated with the word "mob". So, no thanks. dotMob would have been a horrible choice.

.mo - No, this is already in use.

.m - Single-letter TLD's are not allowed (at least as far as I am aware?)

.dev - As in "device".... to me this screams "development". Also does not sound "cool"... think ESPN.dev, Google.dev... etc. Um, no thanks.

.mobi - Easily recognizable as meaning "mobile"... sounds cool (ESPN.mobi, Google.mobi)... rolls off the tongue nicely...

I'm sorry but I can't think of any better name options for the extension than ".mobi".

Please, if anyone else has other extension name ideas, let me know!



Exactly.... which is why I don't understand at all why Jeff is constantly bringing .TEL up in every .MOBI discussion?

Jeff, care to explain why you see .TEL and .MOBI as being so connected?

i agree , good post
repped

.mobi and .m were/are the only two choices

and again i don't think m. would be allowed

 

[Jeff]

Exactly.... which is why I don't understand at all why Jeff is constantly bringing .TEL up in every .MOBI discussion?

Because it's the actual topic of this thread, and germaine to the results of the poll/lively discussion in another thread! :gl: :imho:

Jeff, care to explain why you see .TEL and .MOBI as being so connected?

They're different for the specific reasons stated, and in which I agreed fully 100% with with Galel above ... and the highly brandable .TEL seems to offer quick & easy access to vital contact information for those that are out and about while "on the go"! :music: :talk:
Another popular & preferred choice are the proliferation of the corporate "M Dots", as well!

Both, then, have a 'mobile' component in this regard ... I, and now apparently others, simply see the flaws or potential problematic areas in effectively and efficiently trying to 'brand' an inherently long, two syllabled, and awkward (for lack of a better adjective) extension - it's, to me, counter-intuitive for its use and intent by those that are busily "on the go"! :imho:

-Jeff

 

[000]

They're different for the specific reasons stated, and in which I agreed fully 100% with with Galel above ... and the highly brandable .TEL seems to offer quick & easy access to vital contact information for those that are out and about while "on the go"! :music: :talk:
Another popular & preferred choice are the proliferation of the corporate "M Dots", as well!

The vast majority of mobile web users are looking for much more than contact information. I don't think that point can even be disputed.

So, Jeff, would you agree that for the mobile web space, it's basically a "battle" between ".mobi" and "m dots" (which can coexist in peace, imho)?

 

[Traveler]

Please, if anyone else has other extension name ideas, let me know!

How about .go? It is all about being on the go! Not only that but it would be great for .gov typos

 

[Jeff]

The vast majority of mobile web users are looking for much more than contact information. I don't think that point can even be disputed.

I'd like to see a detailed study of this ... specifically, what Mobile Web™ users are looking for today as well as in the future? I would say, in general and from personal experience, access to vital contact information / directions / related links, etc. are right up there at this time. :talk: :imho:
Moreover, these users that you mention ... are they on super cool iPhones™, Blackberrys© and other smart devices? :gl:

So, Jeff, would you agree that for the mobile web space, it's basically a "battle" between ".mobi" and "m dots" (which can coexist in peace, imho)?

I would not say it like that (as that sounds like it's coming from an .MOBI supporter :p ) ... I would say that we're seeing the proliferation of developed and indexed corporate "M Dots" at the expense of the ".MOBI" (and the developed .MOBI "ecosystem")!
Corporate "M Dots" are here to stay due to efficiencies and economies of scale ... and both it and the the highly brandable .TEL offer more effective branding options for companies in this realm, IMHO.

The ".MOBI" is a small niche, which is fine ... it's adoption could have been more widespread had it focused on enforcing stand-alone developments and ensuring its signature "trustmark" - moreover, time simply wasn't on its side, in my judgement.

How about .go? It is all about being on the go! Not only that but it would be great for .gov typos

.GO ... interesting. :blink:

-Jeff

 

[Pred]

counter-intuitive for its use and intent by those that are busily "on the go"!:

well, as discussed, there could only be one viable name for a mobile extension, and we have it............ .mobi
(see post 34 above and digest, so that you don't keep pasting the same idiotic diatribe you have been for , well, years now)

now, there are many things people do on the net, like bookmarking for good sites so they never have to type in a full url anyway. even though the '4 letter' argument against an extension is ludicrous, we also have voice recognition, we also have search engines lol, so you click the hyperlink, dammit, you can even type in that extra character, albeit , chances are the wording before the dot, is a dman site shorter than other extensions and developed urls as they are affordable at this present time.

oh, forgot to mention there is always the
.mobi button , coming to a phone near you. already out on the samsung instinct. seeing as so many handset manufacturers back .mobi, and nokia ia an avid supporter, with a multitude of .mobi sites, i think we can see this more

note: it is not the '.mobi button' dreamed of by some, merely a tool to quickly select your desired extension. see more here

even without my thorough explanation (i hope), the 2 syllable 4 letter argument, is no argument. it's one only continued by the resident troll.