.mobi .Mobi's missed the boat

[binaryman]

I really am starting to think that. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that .Mobi is starting to catch on in the world. There is just a lot of hot air which is mainly being created by the domainers on this forum still hoping to see their investments taking off. The Mtld site also does not inspire any great confidence and it looks like they and sedo are trying to squeeze the last dregs out of the .mobi gravytrain before it halts to a grinding stop. I invested too(67 .Mobi's) but I have given up hoping that it's going to go anywhere. I think (IMO) .mobi's going nowhere. It is not going to take off and is not being accepted as the great big new mobile internet revolution for mobiles. There still has been no grand promotion to bring it to the general public and I dont think there will be either. And by the time there eventually is such an awareness campaign it will be much to late. The much vaunted investors like Microsoft, Nokia and others have not shown any signs of support and I think never will. Sorry to be so pessimistic but I for one have given up hope and will just let my 67 .mobi's expire quietly. Not even worth putting them up for sale on the market place here as no-one makes any bids or offers on the .mobi's being offered there. Which goes to show that the market for .mobi is slowly dying. I'll count my losses on this one. I did think that .mobi was going to make it big like most of you but I think the writings on the wall now.
Good luck to the rest of you.

 

[Jeff]

Well Jeff my main point is that .mobi is the only tld that offers something completely different than the others, and google might want to distinguish that from their regular .com website by using .mobi. Obviously with .net/.info/biz, whatever, it wouldn't make a difference.

Nooooo .... :yell:
They have invested ZILLIONS into promoting and branding Google.com ... and these emerging technologies, in my view, pretty much assure them that over time that this brand will be further enhanced and saturated, IMHO. For them to possibly confuse visitors or divert eyeballs and dilute their main .COM brand with an funky .MOBI website / address makes very little sense! Humbly.

Same with Bank of America ... for whatever reason, financial or otherwise, they adopted and promoted the "BOFA.mobi" - not in a million years would they have diluted the MAIN brand of Bank Of America™ with BankOfAmerica.mobi (heck, they didn't even bother to secure Bofa.com which leads me to believe, logically, this "Bofa.mobi" was a trial, an experiment IMHO). :blink:
Just my two sense.
-Jeff

 

[dag]

Good decision, Binary, m'boy. I think you're letting the couple of negative voices here get to you too much. Take a look around...a majority of us here think things are coming along quite well.

 

[garrett200]

I totally disagree that people would be confused. If anything, promoting google.mobi would tell them exactly what it is. I don't see this as being anything 'funky' or messing with google's brand whatsoever.

Bank of America seems to have recognized this. Why should they secure bofa.com? There's no need. BofA.mobi is obviously made for one purpose: mobile web. We'll see what goes on later.

 

[dag]

For them to possibly confuse visitors or divert eyeballs and dilute their main .COM brand with an funky .MOBI website / address makes very little sense! Humbly.

Jeff, this statement (IYHFO) says it all and pretty much sets into stone what we've all been saying from the start: you are completely, no matter how much you may beg to differ and say otherwise, anti-.mobi. No one with even a shred of positive interest in the extension would ever say what you just said right there. So please don't try to tell us otherwise.

And please, anyone who may think that Jeff is just another concerned investor like the rest of us, let the statement above stand as proof that he absolutely is not and only wants to do everything he can to undermine your confidence in it.

 

[hawkeye]

Relax and have a nice warmed piece of pumpkin pie friend ... I specifically, as always, posted the :imho: smilie after my opinion and post!



Relax, deep breaths ... :blink: :hearts:

Thank you.
-Jeff

You are a trip! Why don't you just change your moniker to "VIEWS", as that is your real purpose is here in the mobi forum. You troll the mobi forum with your repetitive nonsensical antagonizing anti-ness, just to get threads riled and going, and thus 'page views' up. There literally can be no other explanation!



..oh forgot - :talk: :music:

..aaahh, I feel ... Relaxed!

 

[acc]

Relax and have a nice warmed piece of pumpkin pie friend ... I specifically, as always, posted the :imho: smilie after my opinion and post! .... Relax, deep breaths ... :blink: :hearts:

and you know this to be a true fact?!?!?! or are you just, as usual, spreading negative assumptions based on your lack of verifiable facts!!

And Jeff, I can see why you note 'Just my two sense' in your sig. One, you may not know english!, and two, you probably already lost the other three!!

Remember the .MOBI "default button" days ... and discussions? ....
That, like Google.mobi, is never going to happen!
google.com/mobile
Just my two sense.
-Jeff

I just watched a movie about a Dalai Lama and am very relaxed. Coming back to the NP .mobi threads I realize there are so many unanswered questions ... not about the great potential and ongoing rollout of .mobi but about what passes off for wisdom here. Please help me out here.

As long as we're travelling down memory lane ... all relaxed ... does anyone else remember the NEVER-ending auctions of "HONKERS.mobi" and "SKEDADDLE.mobi " ... ???

The choice of regging those names has always puzzled me (not really) ... because ... out of the 1000's of keyword names available back then someone we know regged those two and started marathon sales threads in an attempt to either"
1. MOCK the extension and "poor Saps" who might buy them from him (nothing personal guys who ended up with them because only you know your branding ideas for them) ... so he and his anti-mobi buddies could get a nice laugh
...OR ...
2. using only his often mentioned "two sense" and years of experience those were the very best names that he could come up with ...???

WHICH IS IT ??? HUH ???

Can anyone here please explain to all of us reading these .mobi boards WHY they should listen to anything that person offers up as wisdom taking those names as an examples of his domaining prowess. Besides, the whopping pennies made in gross profit selling them minus time invested in regging. listing, replying in the threads, and transferring the names at $20.00+/- per hour in labor puts him squarely in the RED.

And considering his penchant for totally missing, or intentionally misstating the real value of just about any .mobi name, why should anyone rely or consider his IMHO for any .mobi appraisal or opinion about the auction results. No matter WHAT happened, we all know that it would not be good enough for him.

Remember ... Before the auction he said there were "LOT of DUDS" on that list. All those "DUDS" sold for a total of $864,000K.

It seems to me that he guessed that the total sale would be in the $200k range, trying to lowball and downplay the extension OF COURSE. So when they go for $850k, the only thing he can come out is that the results are disappointing because "many" thought it would be much higher. ... even though his own thread shows MOST (10/13) guessed right in the ballpark or lower:
1,800,000
1,500,000
1,250,000
963,500
880,000
844,023
750,000
725,000
700,000
666,666 (nice one arnie)
500,010
500,009
150,000 (gou caught drinking jeff juice)

And after that, can anyone please explain WHY if according to him, time is so critical, he claims to be holding one very special .mobi name and is NOT developing it yet while he simultaneously excoriates EVERYONE ELSE about how important it is that they develop their names ASAP into the precious and fragile shmecosystem.

Even the Dalai Lama would be confused .....

 

[Jeff]

The word "funky" above was in the context of the eyes of those for whom Google could possibly confuse visitors or divert eyeballs away and dilute their main .COM brand (in potentially using the .mobi address / website), IMHO. It addressed G's post(s), but if this selected quote furthers your agenda(s), then please feel free ... I'm quite confident with my thoughts and opinions here in the #1 Namepros .MOBI Forum™, IMHO. :gl:

Thanks for understanding.
-Jeff

 

[seanboy]

Same with Bank of America ... for whatever reason, financial or otherwise, they adopted and promoted the "BOFA.mobi" - not in a million years would they have diluted the MAIN brand of Bank Of America™ with BankOfAmerica.mobi (heck, they didn't even bother to secure Bofa.com which leads me to believe, logically, this "Bofa.mobi" was a trial, an experiment IMHO). :blink:
Just my two sense.
-Jeff

Jeff, they did secure bofa.com. It redirects to their main page. Do your homework next time..

http://www.bofa.com

 

[mejcdj]

To assume that people are so stupid they cant make out the difference between .com for PC and .mobi for mobile is a weak argument.

Jeff.. I really used to like and respect you. But over the year, you have really changed my opinion of you.

You post as if you have inside info on every major corp ever mentioned in here, you demand that companies tell you their marketing strategies, you post as an authority with bold statements and then hide behind that infamous 'IMHO'.

You rattle cages and then post calm sarcastic replies that only further aggrivate the situation. Then cry foul when everyone gets tired of it.

You are willing to wait months for a .mobi domainer to get frustrated and you POUNCE like a tiger on it. Then we see your true colors regarding your 'humble' opinions of .mobi.

Its old Jeff.

 

[garrett200]

Jeff, why do you think folks spent more than 4 times what you estimated they would spend in the auctions last week? Surely you don't think it was only those with .mobi rose colored glasses?

One thing I've learned in life is that money talks. I want you to stand up and admit that the auction was a success.

 

[jeremyshaw]

Well, I admit it was a success. But I still haven't seen many .mobi sites out there (I cannot even think of one name... yet!)

 

[garrett200]

not you, the other jeff lol.

 

[mejcdj]

Well, I admit it was a success. But I still haven't seen many .mobi sites out there (I cannot even think of one name... yet!)

http://mtld.mobi/showcase?filter0[]=69

 

[Jeff]

Jeff, why do you think folks spent more than 4 times what you estimated they would spend in the auctions last week? Surely you don't think it was only those with .mobi rose colored glasses?

We'll soon find out very soon who the Buyer's are ... and their - mandated by mTLD if they enforce the Rules! - specific development plans for these websites, IMHO. Who knows, maybe there are a few End users / developers in that mix! I'm hopeful! :blink:

To assume that people are so stupid they cant make out the difference between .com for PC and .mobi for mobile is a weak argument.

I don't understand what you mean ... or how this relates to my dialogue above with G, IMHO.
Please clarifiy as convenient.
-Jeff

 

[garrett200]

Jeff, I think he's talking about what you said about google.mobi being confusing for people and messing with google's branding of google.com. I think its a rather weak argument as well. If google promotes it, google.mobi would be just fine, IMHO.

 

[Jeff]

Jeff, I think he's talking about what you said about google.mobi being confusing for people and messing with google's branding of google.com. I think its a rather weak argument as well. If google promotes it, google.mobi would be just fine, IMHO.

It's a very SOLID argument ... IF you're Google and you've spent BILLIONS upon BILLIONS branding Google.com (and advancing and emerging mobile technologies will allow you to continue to do so and build upon that existing brand!), IMHO. Seriously! :yell:

Think about it.
-Jeff

 

[garrett200]

Jeff, they've spent billions and billions branding GOOGLE. Everyone knows what it is, regardless of the extension they choose to use. This IMHO is a very, very weak argument you are making, sorry.

 

[mejcdj]

It's a very SOLID argument ... IF you're Google and you've spent BILLIONS upon BILLIONS branding Google.com (and advancing and emerging mobile technologies will allow you to continue to do so and build upon that existing brand!), IMHO. Seriously! :yell:

Think about it.
-Jeff

So Google can never ever come up with anything other than Google.com? Do you work for Google? Do you speak for them? Do you have inside info that only you are privy to?

If every company used your logic, there would be no other types of cereal, or shampoo types for different types of hair. There would be ONE Ford and ONE Chevy etc. Why would they make another when they have poured so much money into the first concept?

You make no sense with this at all. Its just an excuse to argue and find a way to devalue .mobi.... again.

 

[seanboy]

Jeff, you ever heard of google.org?

No worries, you can avoid this post like you did with my last one.

 

[mejcdj]

Jeff, you ever heard of google.org?

No worries, you can avoid this post like you did with my last one.

I won't avoid ya sean
I have heard of Google.org.
Are they affiliated with Google tho? :hehe:

 

[seanboy]

I won't avoid ya sean
I have heard of Google.org.
Are they affiliated with Google tho? :hehe:

Google.org is the philanthropic arm of Google.

By the way, as we all know, "Google" is trademarked. "Google.com" isn't. Please refer to the following post...

 

[Jeff]

Jeff, they've spent billions and billions branding GOOGLE. Everyone knows what it is, regardless of the extension they choose to use. This IMHO is a very, very weak argument you are making, sorry.

You're missing the point ... emerging mobile technologies (browsers and auto detection, specifically) can, and I believe will, be structured toward "M Dots", /mobile, and mobile.domain.com's all on the .COM brand, for instance Google.com™ IMHO. :music:
It is highly unlikely that they would structure it OFF of their core .COM brand for the reasons already noted above ... and on to an .MOBI platform, in my personal judgement. :blink:

If every company used your logic, there would be no other types of cereal, or shampoo types for different types of hair. There would be ONE Ford and ONE Chevy etc. Why would they make another when they have poured so much money into the first concept?

You're talking, I believe, about branding ... I am talking about what I believe will be the proliferation of auto-detection and advancing browsers with emerging mobile technologies, again as I mentioned repeatedly above - on the existing .COM platforms IMHO. :gl:
I've noted the branding issue of the .MOBI in the past, as well.
-Jeff

 

[seanboy]

That's 3 now...

Going to bed, nite all

 

[Jeff]

Bed bugs ...

Nightio. :zzz:

 

[garrett200]

Nope, I didn't miss the point, I am aware of the autodetect. But the biggest part of your argument was that Google didn't want to disturb it's branding of google.com because it might confuse people. And that I highly disagree with.

Gotta go skeddadle off to bed now.... :zzz: