new gtlds New gTLDs are DEAD!! Frank Schilling drops 230,000 new gTLD domains

[ksusha64]

Mike Berkens wrote a great article:

Frank Schilling’s North Sound Names Starts Deleting Its 230,000 Uniregistry Domains
http://www.thedomains.com/2016/09/1...arts-deleting-its-230000-uniregistry-domains/

Guy who's pushing new gtlds giving up on it? How many names u guys dropped? Anyone still believes in it?

 

[168]

The problem is that even patience will not pay off.
For example the pioneers who bought .info/.biz domains early are not making such a good return should they liquidate now, that is15 years later. New extensions won't be any different. They should be treated as toxic investments.

Please, Please come up with better examples. .info .biz doesn't even come close to what is offered today. Really ?
There are also .com and .net investments made 15+ years ago that will never be sold, developed or profitable.
Millions of .com/.net domains that nobody wants still sitting idle. Why? Toxic? No. Irrelevant. just like .info/.biz

Given a choice an end user that is a designer would absolutely not choose info or biz over .design
A games company would not choose info or biz over .games
A media company would not choose info or biz over .Media
on and on and on.

Toxic investments? Have you contacted any end users or investors yet? Surly there will be a few that would change their mind based on your perspective. Why limit your expertise to forum postings which you have no interest in?

Happy Hunting

 

[Kate]

Please, Please come up with better examples. .info .biz doesn't even come close to what is offered today. Really ?

These are weak extensions but at the same time they are old and mature, yet they never became popular or desirable. Still, they have been more 'successful' than all new extensions will ever be, with a few exceptions of course. But even the most 'successful' alt extensions are still weak generally and not considered good investments.

There are also .com and .net investments made 15+ years ago that will never be sold, developed or profitable.
Millions of .com/.net domains that nobody wants still sitting idle. Why? Toxic? No. Irrelevant. just like .info/.biz

If you are suggesting all extensions stand equal chances on the market I disagree.
Bad names won't sell regardless of the extension. Majority of .com are indeed not after-market grade but the problem is not the extension, it's the keyword. OTOH with new TLDs the problem is the extension itself (and of course the left of the dot can be a problem too).
Nobody is against .com.

Given a choice an end user that is a designer would absolutely not choose info or biz over .design
...

I guess it's a matter of personal preference. What's happening in reality ? Probably they will choose none of the above.
https://ntldstats.com/tld/design

Remember what some domainers predicted, even Frank himself. New extensions should already be mainstream by now if you listen to them. We are not getting there.

 

[carob]

Given a choice an end user that is a designer would absolutely not choose info or biz over .design
A games company would not choose info or biz over .games
A media company would not choose info or biz over .Media
on and on and on.

How do you know?

Being willing to use an extension and being willing to buy it in the aftermarket are two different things.

And there are a lot of developed info and biz sites, just few aftermarket sales of those domains.

Toxic investments? Have you contacted any end users or investors yet?

Have you?

 

[carob]

Some NGTLDs could succeed, and stil bring no success to domain speculators.

Many will fail and yet in some cases bubble surfing speculators might make money, as they did with .mobi and some other launches like .asia.

No one really knows what will happen but these look like a poor bet, I guess it depends what odds you are willing to risk.

 

[garptrader]

I saw a post about the Super Bowl in Houston and yet Houston.COM after years of being available has still not found a buyer. How many people live in Houston? How many businesses are there in Houston? What is the real estate market like in Houston? There are too many domains for sale and not enough end users willing to pay premium prices for them. Can you afford to renew your new TLD portfolio for twenty years waiting for the market to mature?

 

[168]

Kate,
"Bad names won't sell regardless of the extension"

You nailed it ! That's right. Bad names won't sell regardless of the extension!

Facebook.design is a killer site. For designers.

Cheers

 

[168]

How do you know?

Being willing to use an extension and being willing to buy it in the aftermarket are two different things.

And there are a lot of developed info and biz sites, just few aftermarket sales of those domains.



Have you?

You are correct. Use and aftermarket are two very different things. Use + Investors = Aftermarket. The aftermarket doesn't exist yet.
This market also requires more marketing effort like any new product.

Example : Just a few short years ago the legacies had 98% of the startup market.
Each year since that percentage has been reduced by +/- 10%. They now have about 68%. The market is changing. The marketing is working. Nobody knows which New "G"s will be favored by the market but you can see in the numbers users are willing
Of course there will be many New "G"s just like .info and .biz that won't be able to sustain an aftermarket. Why? because all extensions that don't have perceived profit logic will never be of value.
Example : How big/profitable can you make a .info site? How big/profitable can you make a .Design or .Media site?
.biz ? May be good for a small or local business.
It just doesn't "appeal" to a more professional image thus less likely to be valuable at any time in history not unlike some of the New "G"s. So you don't invest. There are some solid ones to invest in that are category killers and very rare.
Ultimately the user and investor market decides what carries value forward.

Yes. I do contact end users. I have clients that are end users. I track new sites. I track Registrar efforts, I track startups. I track other forums outside the domain industry that use and acquire domains regularly. Since 1999.
I do my best to post facts so people can check the facts for themselves and learn instead of relying on any professionals opinion.
There will always be differing approaches to domaining. One isn't better than the other just different. I get tired of bashers negativity towards a different approach that they have no interested in. In my world it's not professional.

HAPPY HUNTING

 

[168]

I saw a post about the Super Bowl in Houston and yet Houston.COM after years of being available has still not found a buyer. How many people live in Houston? How many businesses are there in Houston? What is the real estate market like in Houston? There are too many domains for sale and not enough end users willing to pay premium prices for them. Can you afford to renew your new TLD portfolio for twenty years waiting for the market to mature?

this is a good example of fact vs fiction.

Is it available? Do you have a source that lists it as "available"?

This domain name is part of the OpenSRS Personal Names Service and is
one of the Tucows owned portfolio of shared domain names. The business
concept behind these domains is to allow multiple users to share domain
names that correspond either with their personal names (surnames) or
their personal interests.
This site makes Tucows money selling email addresses.

There are several posts with examples of New "G"s selling for 20 years reg fee TODAY. That is one of the questions I consider + other fees and others should too. If you don't think it's worth 10x 20 yr reg fees then you shouldn't buy it. There is no doubt in my experience the ones that I invest in will sell for 10x my 20 yr reg cost.
Happy Hunting

 

[dordomai]

Kate,
"Bad names won't sell regardless of the extension"

You nailed it ! That's right. Bad names won't sell regardless of the extension!

Facebook.design is a killer site. For designers.

Cheers

workplace.fb.com - resolving
work.place - dead

I don't think fb is embracing the new Gs. Their domain strategy seems pretty random just like the strategy of Google. Tech giants do not seem to care that much. Some usage will happen but it is not part of a strategy in the grand scheme of things.

Investors are getting bored and end-users realise that they don't need to acquire a nGTLD as they are not needed nor too useful for online marketing.

Eventually this will turn out to be a .mobi x 1000 scenario. I wonder what the next big thing will be? Numeric nGTLDs maybe?

Of course there will be many New "G"s just like .info and .biz that won't be able to sustain an aftermarket. Why? because all extensions that don't have perceived profit logic will never be of value. Example : How big/profitable can you make a .info site? How big/profitable can you make a .Design or .Media site?

How profitable can you make a .travel or .xxx site?

 

[dordomai]

Remember what some domainers predicted, even Frank himself. New extensions should already be mainstream by now if you listen to them. We are not getting there.

In case you haven't noticed, this forum is operating under names.pro and uniregistry can be found under uniregistry.domains ...

Nobody knows which New "G"s will be favored by the market but you can see in the numbers users are willing

I thought that no one could predict which extensions would succeed and then I realised that the answer was very simple: None.

Even the best extensions will not be as desirable as the .com version. Perhaps they will be as successful as .tv.

Some believe that because their nGTLD domain is 3 chars shorter than the .com version everyone will want the nGTLD.This will not work out in the real world.

The problem is that people are using reg numbers as a measure of a success/adaption. In reality this is a meaningless metric as demonstrated by the very 'popular' .tk extension.

 

[ecalc]

... Just a few short years ago the legacies had 98% of the startup market.
Each year since that percentage has been reduced by +/- 10%. They now have about 68%. ...

Dngeek.com publishes a series about domain names used by companies that raised first round angel, seed, series A or venture funding. This month (Jan 2017) they reported 2.8% (7 of 249) of startups chose ngtlds. Glancing back 2016 looks similar.

 

[Rainmaker-NL]

The problem is that people are using reg numbers as a measure of a success/adaption. In reality this is a meaningless metric as demonstrated by the very 'popular' .tk extension.

Correct. But those numbers do have a certain value if used in an intelligent way. I like to look at the growth path where a steady growth is a positive indication and an extension with a lot of sudden leaps is a negative. And the number of signed domains tells you a lot about the people who registered the domains. When looking at the signed domains compared to the total amount of registered domains, you see some clear winners and losers in the top 10 of ngtld's.
.win: 1,209,613 regs - 621 signed (total loser, ast Trump would say)
.xyz: 6,535,705 regs - 9,709 signed
.club: 932,510 regs - 1,201 signed
.online: 650,109 regs - 2,918 signed (best performing of the top 10)

 

[Ross Murray]

nLTDs are a risky market. One must always think before buying anything in that zonre

 

[168]

How profitable can you make a .travel or .xxx site?

Even better !
I'm pretty much done with you and Kate. No dis intended. Great disagreements.
Cheers

 

[168]

Dngeek.com publishes a series about domain names used by companies that raised first round angel, seed, series A or venture funding. This month (Jan 2017) they reported 2.8% (7 of 249) of startups chose ngtlds. Glancing back 2016 looks similar.

I said something other than. What is important is this : the willingness of end users to use something else.
Cheers

 

[slader23]

Dngeek.com publishes a series about domain names used by companies that raised first round angel, seed, series A or venture funding. This month (Jan 2017) they reported 2.8% (7 of 249) of startups chose ngtlds. Glancing back 2016 looks similar.

That sample size seems to small, but thats just imho. There are thousands of start ups live on the internet and looking at the tld choice of just 249 makes me believe there might be some selection bias. A larger sample size would provide a much more representative statistic, so personally I remain remain unconvinced because that statistic is backed by an inadequate sample size. If that was the percentage obtained after observing 10 000 live start ups, I would be more inclined to accept it.

 

[carob]

What is important is this : the willingness of end users to use something else.

What is important to domain resellers is the willingness of end users and speculators to buy something else in the aftermarket.

 

[ecalc]

That sample size seems to small, but thats just imho. There are thousands of start ups live on the internet and looking at the tld choice of just 249 makes me believe there might be some selection bias. A larger sample size would provide a much more representative statistic, so personally I remain remain unconvinced because that statistic is backed by an inadequate sample size. If that was the percentage obtained after observing 10 000 live start ups, I would be more inclined to accept it.

The 249 selection bias is clearly framed by ‘first round’ and ‘Jan 2017’. I quoted it because it’s a recent snapshot. A larger sample of 1218 startups is found in dngeek’s Q3 2016 summary report revealing a 2.1% ngtld share. A random sample of 1218 is sufficient to describe a larger population with a margin of error <3% and a confidence level of 95%. By all means wait for 10,000 random samples to draw a conclusion but don’t be surprised if the parade has passed by.

 

[slader23]

The 249 selection bias is clearly framed by ‘first round’ and ‘Jan 2017’. I quoted it because it’s a recent snapshot. A larger sample of 1218 startups is found in dngeek’s Q3 2016 summary report revealing a 2.1% ngtld share. A random sample of 1218 is sufficient to describe a larger population with a margin of error <3% and a confidence level of 95%. By all means wait for 10,000 random samples to draw a conclusion but don’t be surprised if the parade has passed by.

This is good but where is he sourcing the sample from?

 

[ecalc]

I don't know about his sources or agenda. I'm willing to accept his reports at face value unless I see evidence to the contrary. He lists the individual startups so any errors or omissions can be pointed out here or possibly on his site.

 

[168]

This is good but where is he sourcing the sample from?

From what I understand the source is crunchbase. A great source by the way but in no way representative of the domain industry.

What makes me LOL ECALC is one source doesn't represent an entire industry.
There are several New "G" startups that have been listed here and at Registry sites over the last 2 years yet very few have been listed on the dngeek or crunchbase site. So what does that say about the source? good but very incomplete.
"A random sample of 1218 is sufficient to describe a larger population " NOT. Globally there are 500k startups yearly.
.002% is clearly insufficient.
ECALC
"Do you know how that "random sample" was determined? NO. I do know and would like to suggest to all that hang on every word of a blog to DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK TO VERIFY FACTS VS BIAS OR SLANTED REPORTING. It's not intentional, just incomplete.
dnGEEK is a great blog but just keep in mind he's only reporting what crunchbase is reporting.



Happy Hunting

 

[ecalc]

Dngeek publishes domain names used by companies that have raised first round angel, seed, series A or venture funding. That qualifier excludes a lot of riffraff. They make no claim to report every global startup. Maybe a level headed fair minded person such as yourself is up for that task. I’d help but I broke my slide rule trying to duplicate your 0.002% calculation.

 

[slader23]

Dngeek publishes domain names used by companies that have raised first round angel, seed, series A or venture funding. That qualifier excludes a lot of riffraff. They make no claim to report every global startup. Maybe a level headed fair minded person such as yourself is up for that task. I’d help but I broke my slide rule trying to duplicate your 0.002% calculation.

I'm just not 100% convinced with the data, thats all, I'm not hating on com. I still own a 90% portfolio of .coms and only buy .coms in the aftermarket, in fact I just spent almost $200 buying a high potential .com 30 minutes ago. I have yet to purchase any ngtlds in the aftermarket mainly because the ones I want have too high of a renewal. If you want a better ROI then you can hand reg very, very good ngtlds and sell them for 1000X profit, if you know what your doing and can handle yourself over the phone but .com is still the easiest way to earn quick cash. I can make 20X return on a decent hand reg on NP, no problem, the same can't be said for ngtlds and thats a product of the current state of domain markets.

 

[168]

Dngeek publishes domain names used by companies that have raised first round angel, seed, series A or venture funding. That qualifier excludes a lot of riffraff. They make no claim to report every global startup. Maybe a level headed fair minded person such as yourself is up for that task. I’d help but I broke my slide rule trying to duplicate your 0.002% calculation.

riffraff. ehh. At what elevation do you reside?

Here's a bone. A recent funding that could have easily been reported. 3m in funding. riffraff reported by crunchbase.
DNgeek although a great resource reported two other .ai fundings in the same time frame but each only had 2m in funding.
Waaassupp ! One didn't have to go far to find this on crunchbase or many other news sites including one in this industry that launched my own research. If I'm not mistaken isn't DNgeek in hong kong ? Surely he could have heard about this in his area since the company is based in singapore and is associated with one of the hottest startup sectors Fintech/.AI? No dis intended at all. I highly respect DNgeek for his contributions. This is intended to emphasize doing more of your own research vs taking blogging as "true state of the domains"
Active.ai
OverviewTimelineContributors

ADD TO LIST
TOP CONTRIBUTORS
CrunchBase Staff
ADD TO THIS PROFILE
CONTRIBUTE
Overview
UPDATE
Total Equity Funding
$3.5M in 2 Rounds from 2 Investors
Most Recent Funding
$3M Venture on November 14, 2016
Headquarters:
Singapore, Central Region
Description:
Active.ai is a service that provides chatbots for banking customer service.
Founders:
Parikshit Paspulati, Ravi Shankar, Shankar Narayanan
Categories:
Financial Services, Artificial Intelligence, FinTech

After this you might think about relying less on "snapshots" and doing more of your own research going forward.
I can't emphasize this enough to anyone entering this market, in this market, or thinking about getting into this market, research,
research, research IN ADDITION TO "DOMAIN" REPORTING is the only way to cut thru the chaff and it's a rather appropriate term to use. Pre-New or otherwise extensions is the Pod or shell, Post-New or otherwise extensions are the seeds. Seeds have a natural tendency to grow. To me that is what the "G" stands for in New "G"s. That is where the New Growth will be. The pod/shell market still exists it's just not in the growth stage. MHO !
No one knows what "seeds" will thrive or die. It's not enough to rely on pod/shell experts in this changing market. Your own research in addition to insiders/experts will always be a more responsible approach to investing. 1 source reporting from 1 source and then being suggested as "state of the domains" is an incredibly flawed approach. riffraff.

Happy Fact Hunting

 

[dordomai]

riffraff. ehh. At what elevation do you reside?

Here's a bone. A recent funding that could have easily been reported. 3m in funding. riffraff reported by crunchbase.
DNgeek although a great resource reported two other .ai fundings in the same time frame but each only had 2m in funding.
Waaassupp ! One didn't have to go far to find this on crunchbase or many other news sites including one in this industry that launched my own research. If I'm not mistaken isn't DNgeek in hong kong ? Surely he could have heard about this in his area since the company is based in singapore and is associated with one of the hottest startup sectors Fintech/.AI? No dis intended at all. I highly respect DNgeek for his contributions. This is intended to emphasize doing more of your own research vs taking blogging as "true state of the domains"
Active.ai
OverviewTimelineContributors

ADD TO LIST
TOP CONTRIBUTORS
CrunchBase Staff
ADD TO THIS PROFILE
CONTRIBUTE
Overview
UPDATE
Total Equity Funding
$3.5M in 2 Rounds from 2 Investors
Most Recent Funding
$3M Venture on November 14, 2016
Headquarters:
Singapore, Central Region
Description:
Active.ai is a service that provides chatbots for banking customer service.
Founders:
Pariksh*t Paspulati, Ravi Shankar, Shankar Narayanan
Categories:
Financial Services, Artificial Intelligence, FinTech

After this you might think about relying less on "snapshots" and doing more of your own research going forward.
I can't emphasize this enough to anyone entering this market, in this market, or thinking about getting into this market, research,
research, research IN ADDITION TO "DOMAIN" REPORTING is the only way to cut thru the chaff and it's a rather appropriate term to use. Pre-New or otherwise extensions is the Pod or shell, Post-New or otherwise extensions are the seeds. Seeds have a natural tendency to grow. To me that is what the "G" stands for in New "G"s. That is where the New Growth will be. The pod/shell market still exists it's just not in the growth stage. MHO !
No one knows what "seeds" will thrive or die. It's not enough to rely on pod/shell experts in this changing market. Your own research in addition to insiders/experts will always be a more responsible approach to investing. 1 source reporting from 1 source and then being suggested as "state of the domains" is an incredibly flawed approach. riffraff.

Happy Fact Hunting

technically .ai is a ccTLD...