New gTLD Domain Extensions!

[ZOX]

Hi Guys,

Can't really seem to find good analysis of how the new domain extensions (.guru, .photography, .clothing, etc.) are impacting domain sales, namely .COM?
I'm really interested in this, so any good opinions?
It seems as if .COM is actually getting MORE popular imho :tu:

Thanks!

 

[hawkeye]

..

With those prices in mind, they can just get a .com and pay $8 a year renewal. Long term, it'll be a cheaper and on an extension people are going to be familiar with.

Why do you think domain prices aren't $8 everywhere, like enom, NetSol, Register etc.? Businesses/entrepreneurs don't care if it's $40 or more a year for a name or two, they pay thousands a month just to lease or rent office space. Or work outta their homes to save those thousands a month. A 'small' cost of doing business. The ones concerned about prices at $8 a name, are domainers who own hundreds and thousands of names. And they still complain about the $8 being too high! Domainers who look at these extensions with only 'domainer glasses', are blinded to seeing the overall bigger picture of them.

 

[DnEbook]

*

I love gems, and diamonds are nice

But I also adore champagne

Put them together and ....

Voila!

Champagne.diamonds!

*

what registry are you using i wonder
~
At enom you can reg fake.diamonds for only $370 ……crazy

 

[JB Lions]

Why do you think domain prices aren't $8 everywhere, like enom, NetSol, Register etc.? Businesses/entrepreneurs don't care if it's $40 or more a year for a name or two, they pay thousands a month just to lease or rent office space. Or work outta their homes to save those thousands a month. A 'small' cost of doing business. The ones concerned about prices at $8 a name, are domainers who own hundreds and thousands of names. And they still complain about the $8 being too high! Domainers who look at these extensions with only 'domainer glasses', are blinded to seeing the overall bigger picture of them.

Do you realize you're making an argument for getting a .com? You're talking about businesses spending thousands a month for office space but they won't pay that one time for a .com? They would rather pay reg fee for an untested extension? Confuse people with an extension they've never seen before? Tell me the benefit of that to a new business. And remember any name they get, like champagne.diamonds, there will probably be a champagnediamonds.com. If those type of names aren't reg already, .com folk will snap them up if they're reg in any of the new ones. Every one will have a .com counterpart.

 

[DnEbook]

I think in all walks of life there is constant change
~
I'm putting the kettle on …….it's gonna be a long one LOL
~
No confusion here, if a saw www.free.beer i will remember it and i will have a look and if there is something i like i will return, …. simple

 

[hawkeye]

Do you realize you're making an argument for getting a .com? You're talking about businesses spending thousands a month for office space but they won't pay that one time for a .com? They would rather pay reg fee for an untested extension? Confuse people with an extension they've never seen before? Tell me the benefit of that to a new business.

Domainer Glasses! Why do domainers think that if someone buys a domain in another extension that they have to stop using their .com or have to rebuild their website and brand on this new extension? They can accent, brand and market themselves with them, and have them redirect to their site or build additional related ones on them.

And remember any name they get, like champagne.diamonds, there will probably be a champagnediamonds.com.

So? There'll probably be a champagnediamonds on .co, net, .info, .de, . biz, etc. What's that got to do with the cold weather in the deep south?

 

[JB Lions]

Domainer Glasses! Why do domainers think that if someone buys a domain in another extension that they have to stop using their .com or have to rebuild their website and brand on this new extension? They can accent, brand and market themselves with them, and have them redirect to their site or build additional related ones on them. So? There'll probably be a champagnediamonds on .co, net, .info, .de, . biz, etc. What's that got to do with the cold weather in the deep south?

What in the world are you talking about? I didn't say anything you just posted. Where did I say anything about somebody not using a .com? These new extensions are either for domainers or NEW business. If any business has a .com, of course they're not going to go with another extension, except a few really stupid ones out there I've seen some blog posts on. A new business, if they have thousands a month to spend on office space, can pay for a .com.

Since they're geared towards new business, does it make sense to you:

A) pay reg fee or more and start a business on a new extension

or

B) pay reg fee - few thousand for a .com

Please explain how A makes more sense. Knowing the public is already familiar with .com. Knowing there will be confusion, some traffic leakage, possible lost customers etc on a new extension. Are those problems worth the money you think a business will save trying to build on a new extension? I've yet to see one person give me a good reason for Option A.

 

[DU]

Please explain how A makes more sense. Knowing the public is already familiar with .com. Knowing there will be confusion, some traffic leakage, possible lost customers etc on a new extension. Are those problems worth the money you think a business will save trying to build on a new extension? I've yet to see one person give me a good reason for Option A.

Ask the companies that use Facebook to advertise... or twitter hashtags. Could be that the new TLDs are additional components. I don't see why a Kforce or Powergen wouldn't see some benefit to having a .contractor?

Opening an office in another town doesn't mean you shut down your headquarters.

I wish you'd at least acknowledge ccTLDs some times - there are thousands of successful businesses not on a .com

 

[JB Lions]

Ask the companies that use Facebook to advertise... or twitter hashtags. Could be that the new TLDs are additional components. I don't see why a Kforce or Powergen wouldn't see some benefit to having a .contractor?

Opening an office in another town doesn't mean you shut down your headquarters.

I wish you'd at least acknowledge ccTLDs some times - there are thousands of successful businesses not on a .com

Talking about new business, who these are geared for. The ones you mentioned already have their .com, they don't need some second rate extensions. I've seen some companies get them but they're usually just forwarded to the .com.

A or B. Pick.

 

[hawkeye]

Please explain how A makes more sense. Knowing the public is already familiar with .com. Knowing there will be confusion, some traffic leakage, possible lost customers etc on a new extension. Are those problems worth the money you think a business will save trying to build on a new extension?

Do you have or sell domains in other extensions other than .com? If so, you have your answer.

I've yet to see one person give me a good reason for Option A.

You'll see what you want to see. Hasn't this same question (A) been bothering you also, with startups buying names on .io, .co, .me etc? Or just for these new gTLDs?

You see things as they were, I see things as they'll probably be!

 

[JB Lions]

Do you have or sell domains in other extensions other than .com? If so, you have your answer.

You'll see what you want to see. Hasn't this same question (A) been bothering you also, with startups buying names on .io, .co, .me etc? Or just for these new gTLDs?

You see things as they were, I see things as they'll probably be!

"Do you have or sell domains in other extensions other than .com?"

Yes, usually to other domainers. For the past year+ I only look at .com.

I didn't say they don't buy them, I was asking which one makes more sense. You skipped answering that question. A or B.

 

[hawkeye]

You avoided answering. A or B.

...

And you avoided my query on A. Deuce!

 

[JB Lions]

I actually did answer it:

"I didn't say they don't buy them, I was asking which one makes more sense."

Of course, I can't tell you any .io sites, one you mentioned. You think that was smart, building on an .io? Which .io sites do you use?

 

[hawkeye]

I actually did answer it:

If you say so, but I've never seen you complain that it's not good to start a biz on those extensions I noted.

Of course, I can't tell you any .io sites, one you mentioned. You think that was smart, building on an .io?

Doesn't matter what I think. I'm not the one who built a site on a .io. And they didn't ask for my opinion on their business plans.

 

[DU]

Since they're geared towards new business, does it make sense to you:

A) pay reg fee or more and start a business on a new extension

or

B) pay reg fee - few thousand for a .com

Yes and Yes, B being preferable under most circumstances.

It's not much of a discussion though is it when you provide two incredibly narrow choices on an even narrower premise.

Congratulations, I answered just as you expected!

 

[JB Lions]

If you say so, but I've never seen you complain that it's not good to start a biz on those extensions I noted.

I never felt it was smart. Now I have dipped my toes in .me and .us, (literally a handful in a few others) and both have been profitable for me, but like I said, I don't even look at anything nowadays besides .com. I tried starting a site in .us and couldn't go on just because I felt it was limited, felt like I was wasting my time. But at least those 2 had some demand, 700,000 and 1.8 million. These new ones won't get anywhere near that. Forget what people post, just look at the numbers. Like the example I gave, .name is beating half of them in new regs. I know these are niche and limited but more than .name? .name is horrible, I even think these new ones are better than .name. These are new, fresh, those numbers are horrible.

So as a domainer, I don't want to invest in low demand extensions, just doesn't make sense to me. I already see people putting them up for a few hundred and we're just getting started.

As somebody who makes sites, I only do that in .com.

It's not much of a discussion though is it when you provide two incredibly narrow choices on an even narrower premise.

It's the choice that's out there. I could throw in country codes but if you were in Germany, I would go with .de over these new ones, especially since the ones out so far are all English words. So I think country codes are better as well. Most of these just look like domain hacks to me, I was never into that. I know some people are and some people have made some money with them. Just not for me.

 

[hawkeye]

...
So as a domainer, I don't want to invest in low demand extensions, just doesn't make sense to me. I already see people putting them up for a few hundred and we're just getting started.

As somebody who makes sites, I only do that in .com.

So basically your whole anti gTLD slant is about how 'you' see it/them fitting in 'your domaining scheme of things'. Which is fine. But that doesn't mean they don't/won't make sense to others now and/or in the future. And that's the thing, they're not about how 'domainers' see and use them. Big difference!

 

[JB Lions]

So basically your whole anti gTLD slant is about how 'you' see it/them fitting in 'your domaining scheme of things'. Which is fine. But that doesn't mean they don't/won't make sense to others now and/or in the future. And that's the thing, they're not about how 'domainers' see and use them. Big difference!

I'm not looking at them as just a domainer. My background is business/marketing first, domaining came later. Again, look at the numbers, you see demand in those low numbers? The future? It's pretty much over right after it begins. All the keywords that make sense are pretty much gone after the first day or so. That won't be anything good in the future. My anti-new gtld slant is very simple. From the beginning I said I didn't think there was a real market for these, the low regs bear that out.

There is no future where this makes sense:

"Please explain how A makes more sense. Knowing the public is already familiar with .com. Knowing there will be confusion, some traffic leakage, possible lost customers etc on a new extension. Are those problems worth the money you think a business will save trying to build on a new extension?"

Of course you're going to disagree, you have a new gtld link in your sig.

 

[Ms Domainer]

what registry are you using i wonder
~
At enom you can reg fake.diamonds for only $370 ……crazy

*

Dynadot.

It (.diamonds) was $150 EAP, $40 renewal (it's considered a premium). This is the only early one I have registered.

The one-letter ones are $240 (EAP) at Dynadot, $349 at Go Daddy. Not biting on those, though.

The one-letter ones seem to be more like vanity domains (I have two in .estate) and will not be all that rare, once the other gTLDs start rolling out.

IMHO, the best .diamonds keywords will be color descriptive of diamonds: yellow, blue, red, pink, colorless, etc. Most, if not all, of these are gone or reserved. White.diamonds is nice (and registry reserved), but there is a well-known TM on that term (perfume); besides, I think "colorless" is the standard term for a clear gem.

Champagne (brown) diamonds are heavily marketed to middle-class buyers -- at one time, they were considered "junk" or industrial diamonds, but a clever marketer found a way to make them desirable and appealing. The natural brown (a.k.a Champagne and Chocolate, depending on saturation of colors) diamonds are somewhat rare, so most of the ones sold are irradiated or heat treated, which is accepted in the industry.

From a business standpoint, I like Champagne better than the other colors simply because a yellow or blue diamond market is smaller (albeit richer) than the Champagne market -- I see Champagne diamonds advertised a lot, so much so that I originally thought it was TM'ed (it's not).

I can't think of any other .diamonds domains I would want, though. If end users adopt this gTLD, I can see jewelry stores specializing in diamonds registering their company names -- although .jewelry would be a better choice.

*

 

[IncomeBooster]

Once all the new gtlds get released I wonder who will buy all these domains

 

[DnEbook]

Once all the new gtlds get released I wonder who will buy all these domains

businesses with the ability to see good marketing potential

 

[IncomeBooster]

Of course, but there aren't enough businesses to satisfy the supply. Number of great domains is increased by 5-10 times for every particular niche, and number of end buyers is almost the same or slightly increased. Now it is clear that only big players will stay and those who cant invest at least low x,xxx in new gtlds (like me) will be out of the game.
If anything, now is good time to get a great domain for business for little money.

 

[Kate]

Curious why domainers think there has to be mass regs for an extension to be successful? These new extensions are 'specific and 'niche' oriented, and don't need to be used be all, or by a majority of users.

That's an interesting thought. I have always thought there had to be critical mass for an extension to succeed (so as to gain enough exposure and mindshare).
Of course, not everybody has the same definition of 'success'.
In the case of niche/industry-specific TLDs the real embarrassment is when the intended end users and industry players shun the extension that supposedly was created just for them. Then we can say failure.
.aero, .coop, .museum or .travel are good examples.
In fact, they all fail by the same token and their relevance is nil.

 

[ajkula]

New gTLDs does not have any chance not because they sucks, yet because the public is not aware about them and because all domains that make sense have been taken or will be taken by domainers. That ruined .info, .name, .mobi, .pro etc. Most of domainers are not developers, so this domains will be useless parked pages.

IMHO, in regards of brandability and esthetic if .com and .web started at same time then .web would be winner. Now that will never ever happened.

 

[.NJ]

These are built for domainers to buy to make the registries/registrars money.

This is 100% correct.

These extensions were created in the hopes of maxed max out credit cards and broken bank accounts of the domain addiction.

99% of these new registrations were from the same people reading these threads.

The delusional "hype" of these new extensions stemmed from the same feeds that are part of the "inside" action.

These extensions were never meant to become mainstream or in the hands of where they belong (end-users).

It's just a game of the "hunter" and "prey".

And sorry.........but the prey is not the end-users.

 

[JB Lions]

Remember for those looking for a .sexy .tattoo tomorrow, they won't be at GoDaddy. I read they get like half of the new gtld regs. I was wondering before all of this if they were going to carry all of them. Will be interesting to see the numbers.

Another slow day, 10 of the first 21 didn't break 50 new regs.

People wondering the affect of these new ones on .com (none really) when I'm thinking the affect of .web on these new ones. I figure in 2 years should be at 2 - 5 million regs, minimum. Don't think I'm going out on a limb thinking they'll beat .co numbers. If GoDaddy had .co commercials, I can see some .web ones. No point in pushing a limited .kitchen when you can advertise something that goes with everything. We'll see.