.mobi Some Interesting Research...

[sashas]

I've been looking at premium .com names (I mean the true premiums - Download, Shop, Books, etc,) and their equivalent .mobis..

Now many major corporations own premium .com names. But I couldn't find any premium .mobi names owned by big corporations, only domainers. None of the companies that own premium .coms own the same .mobis

Here's some examples:

Books.com and Book.com - owned by Barnes and Noble
Books.mobi and Book.mobi - owned by Domainers

news.com - CNET
news.mobi - domainer

mortgage.com - CITI
Mortgage.mobi - mTLD

VideoGames.com - GameSpot
VideoGames.mobi - mTLD

Play.com - Play Limited
Play.mobi - mTLD

Gifts.com - Giftco, Inc.

Call.com - Communicate Inc
Call.mobi - some domainer

Start.com - Microsoft
Start.mobi - mTLD

Download.com - CNET
Download.mobi - mTLD

Poker.com - Casper Enterprises
Poker.mobi - some domainer

Motorcycles.com - Honda
Motorcycles.mobi - Domainer

Rent.com - eBay
Rent.mobi - domainer

Shop.com - Shop Inc.
Shop.mobi -mTLD

Games.com and Music.com - owned by AOL
Games.mobi and Music.mobi - owned by Alvaro

Movies.com - owned by Disney
Movies.mobi - owned by Alvaro

Film.com - Real Network
Film.mobi - mTLD

Game.com - Hasbro
Game.mobi - mTLD

Buy.com - owned by Buy.com
Buy.mobi - some domainer

Mobile.com - ATT
Mobile.mobi - mTLD

Online.com - CNET
Online.mobi - mTLD

Loans.com - Bank of America
Loans.mobi - Domainer


It seems to me that all the major corporations haven't picked up any .mobis

Consider Loans.com, for instance. Bank of America owns Loans.com. But Loans.mobi was sold just a few days ago (for 30k, I believe). Bank of America did not buy it, some domainer did. Bank of America could've easily paid more and bought the name, if it wanted it.

Same goes for Games.mobi and Music.mobi. Alvaro belives that these two names can be flipped for a profit. But AOL stayed out of both these auctions. They could've easily out bid Alvaro. But they didn't..


Consider all the big names sold at the auction three days ago. All the top names were bought by domainers for astronomical prices. Sony, Universal, Nokia, Motorola, EA - major corporations that could've benefited a lot from acquiring premium names - stayed out of the auctions. The big names were all bought by one domainer. The end users that really matter, the ones with the big money, all stayed out...

Any ideas why it is so? Why big corporations are not buying their equivalent .mobi names?

 

[Napkin.com]

there's the list.

However,

the argument is that TM names... YES
they are registering those...

paying a premium for generics... NO.

Again, it took a long time for some to
see the value in a generic .com

so I'm not shocked that they aren't jumping
aboard the generic .mobi just yet.

Give it time

 

[namewaiter]

on a side note ... anyone know what happened to the sticky thread that had all those corporate generic regs noted - like cheeseburger.mobi, etc. ???

 

[coast]

Adding my two cents here -- people find out about these auctions at most a month or two before they happen, and most corporate budgets are set at least a year in advance with little or no padding for "extras." That means even if a truly great name comes around, it is unlikely the company that would most benefit for it has ready cash to bid on it all the way to the top.

At one premium auction, I actually contacted Ask.com's marketing department to find out if they knew about the auction. The auction had already started at that point, so there wasn't time for the right department to be found, let alone give them time to research the value of a 1 year old tld.

If a company wants a name, believe me they will come up with the cash down the line. If they are getting enough traffic with their tm name, they may not see the need to own the generic.

All of these reasons point to .mobi as NOT being a quick flip proposition as a generic .com would be. It does not, however, mean that the tld will not be viable to developers, end users, and premium buyers with a plan.

 

[accent]

..... It does not, however, mean that the tld will not be viable to developers, end users, and premium buyers with a plan.

An excellent example is right before us.

The original winner of Music.mobi is certainly not a established corporation. He is a guy with a dream - and, it seems, resources enough to make it happen in this new arena.

Are we seeing a new myspace? Don't know -- but if .Mobi gains acceptance then there will be many many new myspace's. Mobi is a blank page and those with the vision may be able to write large.

 

[sashas]

Alright, here I'll go.

Time and Weather, while being generic names, are ALSO LIVE TMs (yes I checked). Time is a very large corporation that has interest in several major publications, and so is the Weather Channel. Personally, whenever I think of "Time", I think of the magazine, which is under a TM too.
So there goes the argument for their generic nature.

Regarding Insurance.mobi - well, two months after they acquired it, I still see a blank page.

on a side note ... anyone know what happened to the sticky thread that had all those corporate generic regs noted - like cheeseburger.mobi, etc. ???

Cheeseburger is not a premium generic. Not for me at least. I don't think any company paid xx,xxx for it. Heck, maybe they even hand regged it.

Didn't anyone see the post at the top of the dot mobi threads???????????
Come on now,these companys were overlooked in your research...Here's the link....
http://www.namepros.com/dot-mobi/33...-them-here.html

Umm...checked it out. Didn't have the time to go through the entire thread, but from the top post, none of the developed websites were on generic names. They are all TMs. So there goes that argument too...

Again, it took a long time for some to
see the value in a generic .com

so I'm not shocked that they aren't jumping
aboard the generic .mobi just yet.

Give it time

XF, you will agree that 10 years ago, the internet was pretty much non-existent outside a few circles (before the .com boom). Companies weren't even sure that the internet would last. But any company that doubts that the internet would last today is simply going down. And as has been pointed out, mobile internet is already very popular (which even I don't deny). So don't you think that companies should be buying .mobi names right now? There's no denying the internet, or mobile internet today, unlike 10 years ago when you could be very successful without a website.

Moreover, domainers weren't buying and selling .com names for 600k in 1995.

I'm pretty sure that your original post says "I couldn't find any premium .mobi names owned by big corporations, only domainers. None of the companies that own premium .coms own the same .mobis."

My original post said: "But I couldn't find any premium .mobi names owned by big corporations, only domainers. None of the companies that own premium .coms own the same .mobis
"

So in my original post, I wasn't asking for companies that own premium .mobi names. I was asking for companies that own a premium .com, and also own the same premium .mobi.

is not FERRARI big enought

I'm not sure which premium .com and .mobi Ferrari owns...at least I couldn't find any related to their industry.

As far as aI am concerned this is not much of a problem. Insurance.mobi did sell to Insurance.com owners in the auction but other than that you are right. The costs to a large company of aquiring one of those names while not insignificant would be chalaked up as an advertising expense and cost less than a couple of primetime ads.

Insurance.mobi still points nowhere two months later.

And big corporations can be extremely stingy when it comes to money. "Reverse Hijacking" anyone? Any decent generic name has come under that one time or the other. Companies sometimes even pose as small, home businesses without the money to buy big names (check Gene's first post in the "Report Domain Sales Here" thread).
So no, big companies usually don't like to spend big money on domains.


I think I've answered pretty much all the questions.

Just two points:
1.) In my original post, I asked for companies with generic names, not their TM company names. Any sane minded company would reg its generic name for reg fee.
2.) Also, In my original post, I asked for companies that own a premium .com, as well as the same premium .mobi - not just a company that owns a premium .mobi. That won't cut it. In fact, that'll just strengthen the argument that .mobi is for folks who missed out the .com (just as E! owns Style.mobi but not Style.com). The real test is when a big company that owns Generic.com decides that owning Generic.mobi is also worthwhile. Thats when I will be convinced.

There might of course be a few cases here and there (Insurance.com and Insurance.mobi - even though the .mobi points nowhere after 2 months).


Guys, I was a skeptic about .mobi. I wasn't a complete non-believer. But I like to do my research before jumping on an extension. And when I did do my research, I was amazed that big companies that own premium generic .coms aren't really shelling out anything for the same .mobi names. They're using what they could get for reg fee.

Couldn't Bank of America buy Loans.mobi to go with its Bofa.mobi, just as its got Loans.com to go with Bofa.com? 30k isn't too much, don't you think?

My concern is with the fact that so much money is being thrown around just within domainers, without end users buying. A couple of premium names would've been fine, but when you find virtually all premium names being owned by domainers, then it becomes a cause for concern - that tells me that big end users aren't interested in the extension. As an investor, I tend to follow the money. But all the money I can see is domainer money, not corporate money. As a domainer, I want to sell to end user, not other domainers.

 

[Alan Glennon]

Of course domainers have these domains. If a domain like news.mobi was sitting around and NO ONE had registered it, then the extension would truly be proven worthless.

If an ultrapremium existed in any extension with reasonable renewal fees, I would grab it. That wouldn't mean the extension in question was doomed, it would mean that a person that scours the internet for undervalued domains found one, registered it, and means to harness its earning potential. Further, if I acquire a generic, any resale pricing assigned to it will from then reflect market value, and thus, no longer the extreme bargain of a hand reg. Thus, I would not expect companies to aggressively seek mobi generics.

Worry all you want, but worry more when sex.mobi drops and no one takes it!

 

[sashas]

John, fact remains that big companies aren't buying generic .mobi names. A couple of them could be unaware of the extension, but not all of them. At least Nokia, the founder, could've got Phones.mobi if it believed in the extension so much. Domainers bought .mobi names because of the hype.

 

[gou]

My original post said: "But I couldn't find any premium .mobi names owned by big corporations, only domainers. None of the companies that own premium .coms own the same .mobis
"

So in my original post, I wasn't asking for companies that own premium .mobi names. I was asking for companies that own a premium .com, and also own the same premium .mobi.

I know, and that's exactly what I gave you.
The Weather Channel Interactive, Inc. owns both Weather.com and Weather.mobi. Time Inc. owns both Time.com and Time.mobi. These are all developed sites.

 

[Steven]

John, fact remains that big companies aren't buying generic .mobi names. A couple of them could be unaware of the extension, but not all of them. At least Nokia, the founder, could've got Phones.mobi if it believed in the extension so much. Domainers bought .mobi names because of the hype.

I read the DNF .Mobi Crashes Sedo thread, and someone mentioned Nokia Mobile Web Browser (something like OperaMini)
http://www.nokia.com/browser

I'm not sure whether this is old news or not.

 

[Alan Glennon]

I think your argument is more accusatory of companies' understanding of the value of generic domains. These companies are not domaining experts, they are creating an infrastructure for their other services and products.

If these companies do not own their own trademarks as .mobis, that's a whole other matter. You might check -- because, indeed, that would be scathing.

I assure you that CNN registered cnn.com long before realizing that news.com might be an even better name (and by then it was too late).

If domainers bought .mobi because of the hype, that's their problem. Same goes for .com or any other type of domain. Your concerns are more an indictment of all domaining -- and as such, I agree with you. As such, of course, it's worth noting that most domainers fail. They don't have a business plan; they don't keep records; and, they lose money. I think any domain purchase is somewhat built on hype. People are hoping for a lottery ticket. Successful domainers realize that "in the trenches" domaining is just as hard work as any other business sales job.

John, fact remains that big companies aren't buying generic .mobi names. A couple of them could be unaware of the extension, but not all of them. At least Nokia, the founder, could've got Phones.mobi if it believed in the extension so much. Domainers bought .mobi names because of the hype.

 

[cac14850]

My concern is with the fact that so much money is being thrown around just within domainers, without end users buying. A couple of premium names would've been fine, but when you find virtually all premium names being owned by domainers, then it becomes a cause for concern - that tells me that big end users aren't interested in the extension. As an investor, I tend to follow the money. But all the money I can see is domainer money, not corporate money. As a domainer, I want to sell to end user, not other domainers.

In some regards you are right. The place to buy mobis is not the premium market. It is on the aftermarket where you can get good prices for generics. As much as you make the argument those .coms owners dont own the mobi version, what is the ratio in other extensions? Further, look at all the lawsuits company's went through to get their copyrighted names back from cybersquatters a few years ago. While we all know how that would turn out today, the point is that large companies were hardly anywhere near being in front of the .coms and a large percentage have at least bought their mobi counterparts to avoid the hassle of trying to take them back in the future. THis is not an established extension and all of the info you are using to make your argument on suppose a more established infrastructure than currently exist. I realize you are making the arguments to determine buying potential now rather than 6 or 9 months ago and frankly I am not sure what i would do in todays envirornment. However, for those who have been in for a while, your arguments matter a lot less than for those debating whether or not to get in today. THat is not to say you dont have valid points but you are making them when mobi is in an upward part of a cycle rather than three months ago when the sky was falling in over here.

 

[sashas]

I know, and that's exactly what I gave you.
The Weather Channel Interactive, Inc. owns both Weather.com and Weather.mobi. Time Inc. owns both Time.com and Time.mobi. These are all developed sites.

But again, I asked for premium "generic" names, not TMs. As you yourself just said, Time and Weather are both TMs (and yes, I checked the uspto site)

In some regards you are right. The place to buy mobis is not the premium market. It is on the aftermarket where you can get good prices for generics. As much as you make the argument those .coms owners dont own the mobi version, what is the ratio in other extensions? Further, look at all the lawsuits company's went through to get their copyrighted names back from cybersquatters a few years ago. While we all know how that would turn out today, the point is that large companies were hardly anywhere near being in front of the .coms and a large percentage have at least bought their mobi counterparts to avoid the hassle of trying to take them back in the future. THis is not an established extension and all of the info you are using to make your argument on suppose a more established infrastructure than currently exist. I realize you are making the arguments to determine buying potential now rather than 6 or 9 months ago and frankly I am not sure what i would do in todays envirornment. However, for those who have been in for a while, your arguments matter a lot less than for those debating whether or not to get in today. THat is not to say you dont have valid points but you are making them when mobi is in an upward part of a cycle rather than three months ago when the sky was falling in over here.

That is what my whole argument is about. That for a non established extension that isn't very popular with end users in terms of high value generic names, .mobi is being speculated a bit too much. No other extension is garnering 600k sales. The big ccTLDs, .de and .co.uk can hardly match up with that, and these ccTLDs are very very popular in their respective countries.
While Alvaro might be able to suffer a $1.3 million setback, not all domainers can afford to lose xx,xxx amounts.

I read the DNF .Mobi Crashes Sedo thread, and someone mentioned Nokia Mobile Web Browser (something like OperaMini)
http://www.nokia.com/browser

I'm not sure whether this is old news or not.

And hey, Nokia was one of the .mobi founders!
No wonder it didn't buy Phones.mobi

 

[gou]

But again, I asked for premium "generic" names, not TMs. As you yourself just said, Time and Weather are both TMs (and yes, I checked the uspto site)

If you don't consider a word to be generic if it's trademarked, why do you have trademarked words in your original list?
Also, you've neglected foreign generics such as Chokin (meaning "save" in Japanese; PSC Inc owns the .mobi version while the .com version is owned by some domainer in South Korea).

 

[sashas]

If you don't consider a word to be generic if it's trademarked, why do you have trademarked words in your original list?
Also, you've neglected foreign generics such as Chokin (meaning "save" in Japanese; PSC Inc owns the .mobi version while the .com version is owned by some domainer in South Korea).

There's a lot of difference between Time.com/.mobi and Shop.com/.mobi. Time is a very old and very widely recognized TM. Loans or Shop, even if there's a TM on them (I haven't checked uspto), it doesn't matter. The average population does not associate a TM company name with them, they do with Time, just as they do with Windows. I'm sure you'll agree. Further, one name doesn't change things anyway.

And regarding "Chokin", you just repeated what most people say about .mobi - PSC could not own the .com version (its owned by a domainer from Korea), hence it got the .mobi - folks get the .mobi when they can't get the .com

 

[tophatter]

nokia link:

http://asia.nokia.com/A4405606

 

[sashas]

nokia link:

http://asia.nokia.com/A4405606

eeks dude. Do you eve bother to read a thread before posting?

off topic, you might be interested in this too: nokia.com/browser.

 

[bucks]

"No other extension is garnering 600k sales. The big ccTLDs, .de and .co.uk can hardly match up with that, and these ccTLDs are very very popular in their respective countries."

It looks like you just answered your own question with this statement Sashas.

.mobi IS NOT a cc. but is being branded as a World Wide ext. for the mobile Internet. It's running it's own race that has nothing to do with cc's or even .com for that matter, but an entirely Brand New Emerging Market that is in fact World Wide.

Look for .mobi prices to continue to rise as the mobile Internet hits main stream and becomes a part in our every day lives.

Yes- no doubt about it, .mobi is the new kid on the block in a brand new World Wide Market. This kind of reminds me of grade school where all the bully's gang up on the new kid just because he has a different way of doing things and makes them fell THREATEND that they may loose some of their credibility (market share)

It just amazes me how everybody keeps trying to compare a bunch of apples to the one and ONLY orange in the entire bunch.

 

[sashas]

"No other extension is garnering 600k sales. The big ccTLDs, .de and .co.uk can hardly match up with that, and these ccTLDs are very very popular in their respective countries."

It looks like you just answered your own question with this statement Sashas.

.mobi IS NOT a cc. but is being branded as a World Wide ext. for the mobile Internet. It's running it's own race that has nothing to do with cc's or even .com for that matter, but an entirely Brand New Emerging Market that is in fact World Wide.

Look for .mobi prices to continue to rise as the mobile Internet hits main stream and becomes a part in our every day lives.

Yes- no doubt about it, .mobi is the new kid on the block in a brand new World Wide Market. This kind of reminds me of grade school where all the bully's gang up on the new kid just because he has a different way of doing things and makes them fell THREATEND that they may loose some of their credibility (market share)

It just amazes me how everybody keeps trying to compare a bunch of apples to the one and ONLY orange in the entire bunch.

To me, .mobi remains a TLD that only domainers are buying. And I have given considerable arguments regarding this. I don't see a single reason for Sony or Universal to pay 1 million plus for Music.mobi when it can get a quite similar .com for a little more (or less) and that .com will have type-in traffic too (if its a good .com, a LOT of type-in traffic).

So yes, .mobi might be the new kid on the block trying too hard to be cool, but the cool crowd, the ones with the big money, they don't think too much of it.

 

[bucks]

To me, .mobi remains a TLD that only domainers are buying. And I have given considerable arguments regarding this. I don't see a single reason for Sony or Universal to pay 1 million plus for Music.mobi when it can get a quite similar .com for a little more (or less) and that .com will have type-in traffic too (if its a good .com, a LOT of type-in traffic).

So yes, .mobi might be the new kid on the block trying too hard to be cool, but the cool crowd, the ones with the big money, they don't think too much of it.

To You???
we'll that is your opinion and like a?? holes we all have one.

Of course .com will have more traffic then ANY ext. daa

You keep trying your hardest comparing something that is already we'll branded in EVERYBODYS mind to an ext that is still brand new.

Just how do you know the ones with the Big Money (as you say) don't think much of it. That is a very arrogant statement thinking you KNOW what EVERYBODY else thinks or does.

It's a brand new market and just like .com. it will take some time to mature.
So chill out and at least give it some time before making statements that can't possibly be proven this early in the game.

 

[cac14850]

Sasha,
Here is a today news release showing quote.com obviously owning quote.mobi:

eSignal Unveils Enhanced Financial Portal Site Quote.com 2.0
Print article
Refer to a friend
© Business Wire 2007

2007-12-10 15:46:31 -


www.esignal.com - eSignal David Parkinson, 801-971-2450 [email protected] or Investor Relations Andrew Kramer, 781-687-8306 [email protected] eSignal, the desktop solutions division of Interactive Data Corporation (NYSE: IDC) and a leading provider of streaming, real-time financial market data, news, analytics and decision-support tools for professional and individual traders, today announced the launch of Quote.com 2.0, an
upgrade to its premier Web-based global financial portal.

"We recreated this new, high-powered version of Quote.com completely from scratch," said Chuck Thompson, president of eSignal. "We don't see another website on the market quite like it. Every element of Quote.com 2.0 was designed to enable users to better locate and use essential financial information-- from data and charts to research, news and analysis-- to make more effective financial decisions."

Quote.com 2.0's newly created interactive Stock Charts feature has timeline tracking, integrated chart studies, news and export features. The updated Portfolio Manager feature allows users to track multiple financial portfolios, customize watch lists, filter news, and set up mobile stock and fund alerts.

A new Personal Finance section provides users with added content to help manage other aspects of their financial lives, such as real-estate information, college and tax planning, and debt management. Equipped with an array of worksheets and calculators, users can make more informed decisions regarding their financial health. This site continues to be one of very few offering free financial content for multiple asset classes from around the world.

Like the prior version, Quote.com 2.0 is still the source for one-click access to individual stock and market index information, including stocks with the highest volume for the day; the largest percentage gainers and losers; stocks reaching new yearly highs or dropping to new yearly lows; unusual volume; most volatile, unfilled gaps, and number of trades. Specific hot lists for U.S. stocks include the very short-term high and low, and stocks with the greatest trading range. Market indices are also available with hot lists for the U.S. highest percentage gainers and losers.

Quote.com 2.0 Features:

-- New interactive charts with many customizable features. Site visitors can choose from thirteen technical studies, five chart styles and a wide range of chart preferences and effects. Change the chart interval from maximum, year, month, week, day or intraday, or scroll through time using the time slider.

-- New personal finance section with engaging articles and calculators helps users navigate through life's milestones. Includes advice on preparing to pay for retirement and college tuition, as well as researching mortgages and car loans. Also, tips for managing debt, saving money, preparing for tax season, and more.

-- Data from major worldwide exchanges, including the Australian Stock Exchange, Toronto Stock Exchange, Shanghai Stock Exchange, Euronext Paris, Xetra, Hong Kong Stock Exchange, National Stock Exchange of India, Stock Exchange of Singapore, Madrid Stock Exchange, London Stock Exchange, and many more, as well as news, commentary, analyst recommendations, alerts and free newsletters.

-- Separate sections of the site dedicated to financial quotes, market data and business news for the UK, China, France, Spain, Germany, India, Canada, Australia, Singapore and Hong Kong.

-- Access to delayed stock, futures, Forex and mutual fund quotes, and business news and charts via Quote.mobi anytime, nearly anywhere, using any browser, cell phone, PDA or Smartphone. Users also can set watch lists and use a chart-interval feature to monitor specific investment opportunities.

-- Link to RagingBull.com, a leading financial social networking site. RagingBull offers traders a place to post and read messages, track trading discussions and keep up with the latest trading news and commentary.

About Interactive Data:

Interactive Data Corporation (NYSE: IDC) is a leading global provider of financial market data, analytics and related services to financial institutions, active traders and individual investors. The Company's businesses supply time-sensitive pricing, evaluations and reference data for more than 3.5 million securities traded around the world, including hard-to-value instruments. Many of the world's best-known financial service and software companies subscribe to the Company's services in support of their trading, analysis, portfolio management and valuation activities. Through its businesses, Interactive Data Pricing and Reference Data, Interactive Data Real-Time Services, Interactive Data Fixed Income Analytics, and eSignal, the Company has approximately 2,200 employees in offices located throughout North America, Europe, Asia and Australia. The Company is headquartered in Bedford, Mass. Pearson plc (NYSE: PSO; LSE: PSON), an international media company, whose businesses include the Financial Times Group, Pearson Education, and the Penguin Group, is Interactive Data Corporation's majority stockholder.

Interactive Data(SM) and the Interactive Data logo are service marks of Interactive Data Corporation.

About eSignal:

eSignal (www.eSignal.com), Interactive Data Corporation's (NYSE: IDC) desktop solutions business, is a leading global provider of financial and business information to professional traders and active individual traders. Building on a legacy of nearly 25 years of delivering time-sensitive financial information, eSignal provides streaming, real-time market data, news and analytics. eSignal's suite of products includes eSignal(R), Advanced GET(R), QuoTrek(R), FutureSource(R), MarketCenter LIVE(SM), QCharts(R), LiveCharts(R), Market-Q(SM) and the Web portals FutureSource.com, Quote.com(R) and RagingBull.com.

Quote.com 2.0 Offers Worldwide Investors New Interactive Stock
Charts, More Personal Finance Tools, and Insightful Financial Content.