new gtlds Speculations on New gTLDs

[atinc]

Speculations on Domain Industry

There is one thing which is crystal clear about domain industry :

• Dot Com investors hate the new gTLDs!

Why? Because before the new G era, "the domain investors" invested on millions of dot Com domains, even a regular domainer today held hundreds of domains in their portfolio.

The new gTLDs have been the biggest nightmare for the serious dot Com investors and will continue to be..

When you see the statistics, dot Com domain sales dropped dramatically since the new gTLDs introduced to the market.

The demand on new extensions excited millions of people all over the world since it is an unexplored land on Web.

There are thousands of generic names available to be registered.

Comparing to dot Com, where people registering 4 letter non-sense domains or ridiculous made up (brandable) names...

Most of you know that travel.agency sold for 3000 USD in the beginning of this year.

Earlier travel.agency sold for $9999 at Flippa in May 2016.

And today Travel.Agency directs to a ridiculous domain name : http://www.jdjdjdjdjdjdj.com/

Search and see yourself...

I personally believe that the owner of travel.agency is still the same person since the day it was registered.

Pure speculation that hits the top news on every domain related media available on the Web.

Ever since the news about travel.agency, there have been dozens of topics created on domain related websites..

Nice move by dot Com speculators against their biggest competitor: the new gTLDs.

But not smart enough..

The first domain was registered back at 1985 and it was a dot Com, yet majority of the Million Dollar domain sales took place between 2007-2017.

The industry needed 22 to 32 years to reach a maturity.

Wait and see the victory of new gTLDs...

 

[Kate]

The registries usually do not sell names for cheap. What makes you think end users would not buy them from domainers, and get a better deal ? The registries are precisely those sitting on domains forever. Ironic, isn't it ? Hoarding domain names so that they do not rot in the hands of speculators.
Anyway, the registry is almost always the only selling names in new extensions.
That's my point, you're playing against the casino...

 

[168]

The registries usually do not sell names for cheap. What makes you think end users would not buy them from domainers, and get a better deal ?
Ironic, isn't it ? Hoarding domain names so that they do not rot in the hands of speculators.
Anyway, the registry is almost always the only selling names in new extensions.
That's my point, you're playing against the casino...

The Truth is, The top investors that would most likely have ended up with the best New"G"s (as demonstrated in the .com world)
would have waited until they sold them for MORE.
Would you prefer the sales go to A wealthy investor?, A well connected investor ?, An investor willing to pay pre-release pricing?
An investor willing to sit on it for 10+ years ?
98% of "investors" would not have had the opportunity anyway. A "win" for end users. A "win" for promoting alternatives. How would an extension gain traction if an investor sat on it ? Do investor provide incentives ? NO.

End users don't give a rat's *ss who sells the domain to them. What they care about is the ability to get it!

"The registries are precisely those sitting on domains forever." LAME. 1. In case you haven't noticed, they are selling them.
2. In case you haven't noticed, almost all high dollar legacy sales have hold times of 7-10 years. Registry? NO. Investors!
Happy Hunting

 

[slader23]

This whole argument is overdrawn. I own ngtlds and I've decided not to bother with this kind of debate. Just stick anything you believe is worth significantly more than reg fee, in other words word.word, emd hacks in the vault and operate in .com, until some special situation changes the investment environment. No need to debate this anymore. There will always be valid arguments for both sides.

 

[atinc]

This whole argument is overdrawn. I own ngtlds and I've decided not to bother with this kind of debate. Just stick anything you believe is worth significantly more than reg fee, in other words word.word, emd hacks in the vault and operate in .com, until some special situation changes the investment environment. No need to debate this anymore. There will always be valid arguments for both sides.

Yes, you don`t bother so you decided to write a statement that you don`t bother. Come on now!
Look at you claiming you own new G s but I can`t see one where you showcase your best domains below your comment.
Can`t blame the industry because of your bad investments.
Don`t bother..

 

[slader23]

Yes, you don`t bother so you decided to write a statement that you don`t bother. Come on now!
Look at you claiming you own new G s but I can`t see one where you showcase your best domains below your comment.
Can`t blame the industry because of your bad investments.
Don`t bother..

One example of the ngtlds I own would be Fishing.Tools...just because there aren't any in my signature doesn't mean I don't own them. I'm not looking to sell that name for another few years and I have a few more emd hacks that I won't be touching until the environment becomes more favorable.

 

[atinc]

One example of the ngtlds I own would be Fishing.Tools...just because there aren't any in my signature doesn't mean I don't own them. I'm not looking to sell that name for another few years and I have a few more emd hacks that I won't be touching until the environment becomes more favorable.

Right strategy yet I find Fishing.Tools a better domain name than your showcase domains.
For the domain hack names : I don`t really think they are a good investment since the complete thing looks too scamy. What is your favorite domain hack?

 

[slader23]

Right strategy yet I find Fishing.Tools a better domain name than your showcase domains.
For the domain hack names : I don`t really think they are a good investment since the complete thing looks too scamy. What is your favorite domain hack?

Word.Word emd ngtlds are domain hacks. Fishing.Tools is an ok hack, but definitely not better than the names on my signature, a few of those I'd be hard pressed to sell for less than 25k. My favorite hacks are probably Data.Center and Secure.Network.

 

[atinc]

Word.Word emd ngtlds are domain hacks. Fishing.Tools is an ok hack, but definitely not better than the names on my signature, a few of those I'd be hard pressed to sell for less than 25k. My favorite hacks are probably Data.Center and Secure.Network.

I thought you mean domain.es kind of names as domain hacks. You mean generic matches. Ohh boy Data.Center is beautiful! Better than fishing.tools . How much would you price a domain like that?

 

[slader23]

I thought you mean domain.es kind of names as domain hacks. You mean generic matches. Ohh boy Data.Center is beautiful! Better than fishing.tools . How much would you price a domain like that?

Data.Center? Probably 6 figures, depends on the renewal though.

 

[atinc]

Data.Center? Probably 6 figures, depends on the renewal though.

If I were the owner of Data.Center I would never sell it.
It would be a great continues money generator if you invest to developping it.

 

[HotKey]

Word.Word emd ngtlds are domain hacks. Fishing.Tools is an ok hack, but definitely not better than the names on my signature, a few of those I'd be hard pressed to sell for less than 25k. My favorite hacks are probably Data.Center and Secure.Network.

I don't think emd's need to be called hacks..it should just be assumed, part of its defnitive "thing". This way we don't go confusing things. We should just stick with calling emd's emds. It even sounds great. I wonder who coined that?
Calling a domain a hack should be reserved for a domain that's just that, a hack. When the name requires it's extension for it to make sense. Fish.Net is an emd. Fishn.et is a hack (no there is no .et, e.t. go home).

btw Data.Center and Secure.Network /whistles

 

[slader23]

I don't think emd's need to be called hacks..it should just be assumed, part of its defnitive "thing". This way we don't go confusing things. We should just stick with calling emd's emds. It even sounds great. I wonder who coined that?
Calling a domain a hack should be reserved for a domain that's just that, a hack. When the name requires it's extension for it to make sense. Fish.Net is an emd. Fishn.et is a hack (no there is no .et, e.t. go home).

btw Data.Center and Secure.Network /whistles

Whatever floats your boat, everyone has their own way of looking at things. Yea Data.Center and Secure.Network are my favorite, wish I owned them :P but I bet the renewals are both 4 figures...

 

[newviewit]

atinc - it's kind of obvious that you're invested heavily in the new gtld's. You're new and only existed in namepros stirring up a debate in this forum post. Are you any way affiliated with or are you an owner of one of these new gtld's?

I ask because that's what the new gtld's will have to do if they want to succeed = marketing. It takes lots of time an money introducing something new to an established market (.com). Godaddy has already bought into the marketing by placing new gtlds at the top of their search results. Sedo's doing the same.

If enough money can be spent convincing everyone in the world that words between dots = a domain name then the new gtld's may work.

But at the moment my grandma and everyone on earth knows that something ending in a.com is a website address.

Not everyone understands that mystery.travel is a website or bike.store.

Key thing is branding for lots of companies... and at the end of the day multinational companies are all sticking with .com because it's an established and very well known brand that everyone understands. New gtld's can't compete marketing wise with multinational companies putting .com in marketing campaigns everywhere you go.

Then you have businesses that have already invested in .com - why would they switch to an unknown brand for an unknown reason? most will not.

So maybe a few speculators and small startups go for the domain.hack type of domain... but at the end of the day the market decides. There might be a few domain.hack domains being extremely successful building brands in their niches. But overall there's just not enough reason or marketing money to get everyone to understand domain.hacks. It's a risky investment.

 

[atinc]

atinc - it's kind of obvious that you're invested heavily in the new gtld's. You're new and only existed in namepros stirring up a debate in this forum post. Are you any way affiliated with or are you an owner of one of these new gtld's?

I ask because that's what the new gtld's will have to do if they want to succeed = marketing. It takes lots of time an money introducing something new to an established market (.com). Godaddy has already bought into the marketing by placing new gtlds at the top of their search results. Sedo's doing the same.

If enough money can be spent convincing everyone in the world that words between dots = a domain name then the new gtld's may work.

But at the moment my grandma and everyone on earth knows that something ending in a.com is a website address.

Not everyone understands that mystery.travel is a website or bike.store.

Key thing is branding for lots of companies... and at the end of the day multinational companies are all sticking with .com because it's an established and very well known brand that everyone understands. New gtld's can't compete marketing wise with multinational companies putting .com in marketing campaigns everywhere you go.

Then you have businesses that have already invested in .com - why would they switch to an unknown brand for an unknown reason? most will not.

So maybe a few speculators and small startups go for the domain.hack type of domain... but at the end of the day the market decides. There might be a few domain.hack domains being extremely successful building brands in their niches. But overall there's just not enough reason or marketing money to get everyone to understand domain.hacks. It's a risky investment.

TIME - TIME - TIME...
We only need time to see how it goes.
3 years in the market and the highest price paid for a new G is more than $200,000
.Com first introduced back in 1985 yet most of the million dollar sales occurred between 2007-2017.
Internet usage and websites are growing in numbers each year in the world and start-ups going in business every single day.
Every possible combination in dot Com, even non-sense 4 letter domains are not available.
This is why G`s are necessary for the market and it is a big opportunity for domain investors in my honest opinion.
For me I have not heavily invested on new G`s or dot Com`s, I just have over 100 domains in my portfolio. (should be 40% dot Com 60% new gTLDs) And renewals are not a big problem for me. I am not a domain trader I am a domain investor. Hope you understand what I mean.

 

[NigelD]

TIME - TIME - TIME is running out for a lot of the new ngtlds - see these stats

Losing over 100k registrations a day (last 7 days) over all the new extensions. A lot of them are already in decline - and a lot of the cheap and 1 cent promotions will start showing up in about 5 months time. I'm not sure time is going to help.

 

[atinc]

TIME - TIME - TIME is running out for a lot of the new ngtlds - see these stats

Losing over 100k registrations a day (last 7 days) over all the new extensions. A lot of them are already in decline - and a lot of the cheap and 1 cent promotions will start showing up in about 5 months time. I'm not sure time is going to help.

The decline is natural. There are too many unnecessary extensions out there like .horse. (BUT THERE ARE SOME REALLY COOL EXTENSIONS WITH GENERIC WORD COMBINATION AVAILABILITY WITH NEW GTLDS)
On the other hand Frank Schilling’s North Sound Names deleted Its 230,000 Uniregistry Domains ALONE!!!
Take a look at the extensions and guess why they are dropping those domains..
So for the statistics I am not shocked or depressed, it was obvious after Frank`s move, basic maths..

 

[Kate]

.Com first introduced back in 1985 yet most of the million dollar sales occurred between 2007-2017.

Misleading argument. Domain names had no value until the rise of the WWW, that is a decade later. And then it took time for the Internet to mature. Today we can say the Internet is mature and part of the social fabric. It's not just a question of awareness, even people who see new strings simply aren't convinced easily.

Internet usage and websites are growing in numbers each year in the world and start-ups going in business every single day.
Every possible combination in dot Com, even non-sense 4 letter domains are not available.

This is why G`s are necessary for the market and it is a big opportunity for domain investors in my honest opinion.

No, because there are too many extensions for limited demand. Not everybody needs a LLL.com or LLLL.com. People either use longer .com or get creative. Outside America, ccTLDs are popular and even dominant. Foreign end users don't need those fuzzy English strings when they have a ccTLD that is trusted and popular. New extensions will never do well on the foreign markets that have a strong local extension.

Also, new extensions are expensive too. Either the purchase price, or the renewal price (that can increase dramatically). But the registries have reserved massive inventory, and domain speculators scooped up the crumbs left. Many end users will find out that the string they could want is already taken, and they would still have to buy from the registry or from a domainer. So they will pass.

Most reported sales are in the low $$$$ range. There are very few names in .com worth millions. It is funny that people argue that we need new extensions because .com is overpriced, but they quote non-representative sales in .com.
The startup argument is slightly amusing. They can raise millions but they cannot spend 2K on a good domain ? Maybe they don't understand the need but that's another issue.
Actually there is no shortage of decent .com with brain storming. If you want to premium stuff, you'll always have to pay for it. But you won't always get the same kind of return.

For domain investors it is a big opportunity to lose a lot of money. I will say just one thing: if you have never sold a .com, how can you be sure you are picking the right domains and what makes you think new extensions will be your savior ?

 

[Brands.International]

I have totally different opinion then Kate. I think for domain investors new gTLDs are very good opportunity to earn money. But the investments has to be done now, not after years when all will be safe and stabilized, but whole opportunity will be totally gone.

Those who are afraid and not investing today will have nothing in their hands in few years. I dare to predict they will envy those who have invested, very much.

But they will unfortunately have empty hands. We call it 'late to the party'. It will be quite sad imo

 

[atinc]

Misleading argument. Domain names had no value until the rise of the WWW, that is a decade later. And then it took time for the Internet to mature. Today we can say the Internet is mature and part of the social fabric. It's not just a question of awareness, even people who see new strings simply aren't convinced easily.

No, because there are too many extensions for limited demand. Not everybody needs a LLL.com or LLLL.com. People either use longer .com or get creative. Outside America, ccTLDs are popular and even dominant. Foreign end users don't need those fuzzy English strings when they have a ccTLD that is trusted and popular. New extensions will never do well on the foreign markets that have a strong local extension.

Also, new extensions are expensive too. Either the purchase price, or the renewal price (that can increase dramatically). But the registries have reserved massive inventory, and domain speculators scooped up the crumbs left. Many end users will find out that the string they could want is already taken, and they would still have to buy from the registry or from a domainer. So they will pass.

Most reported sales are in the low $$$$ range. There are very few names in .com worth millions. It is funny that people argue that we need new extensions because .com is overpriced, but they quote non-representative sales in .com.
The startup argument is slightly amusing. They can raise millions but they cannot spend 2K on a good domain ? Maybe they don't understand the need but that's another issue.
Actually there is no shortage of decent .com with brain storming. If you want to premium stuff, you'll always have to pay for it. But you won't always get the same kind of return.

For domain investors it is a big opportunity to lose a lot of money. I will say just one thing: if you have never sold a .com, how can you be sure you are picking the right domains and what makes you think new extensions will be your savior ?

I know you are trying to help people not to lose money for an asset that you don`t think have a value, and I appreciate that but hey lets make a deal @Kate :

You will not invest on new gTLDs and I keep buying more.
Is that fair enough?

Again thank you for your consideration, I wish you the best

 

[atinc]

I have totally different opinion then Kate. I think for domain investors new gTLDs are very good opportunity to earn money. But the investments has to be done now, not after years when all will be safe and stabilized, but whole opportunity will be totally gone.

Those who are afraid and not investing today will have nothing in their hands in few years. I dare to predict they will envy those who have invested, very much.

But they will unfortunately have empty hands. We call it 'late to the party'. It will be quite sad imo

Exactly

 

[dordomai]

Those who are afraid and not investing today will have nothing in their hands in few years. I dare to predict they will envy those who have invested, very much.

But they will unfortunately have empty hands. We call it 'late to the party'. It will be quite sad imo

there will be more launches, hard to miss everything. better late to the party than being too early in .party

 

[atinc]

there will be more launches, hard to miss everything. better late to the party than being too early in .party

@dordomai Which upcoming extensions you are willing to invest?
any suggestions?

 

[bmugford]

TIME - TIME - TIME...
We only need time to see how it goes.
3 years in the market and the highest price paid for a new G is more than $200,000
.Com first introduced back in 1985 yet most of the million dollar sales occurred between 2007-2017.
Internet usage and websites are growing in numbers each year in the world and start-ups going in business every single day.

I have seen this argument multiple times from supporters of new gTLD, and it is makes no sense.
The internet was not a commercial entity when .COM was introduced. People did not have widespread access to the internet for more than a decade after that.

New gTLD demand has been underwhelming to say the least. Pretty much every prediction made by a new registry has been far off from the reality.

The peak interest of an extension is normally at launch.
If you look at every recent extension introduced since 2002, TIME only brought value down, not up.

Brad

 

[atinc]

I have seen this argument multiple times from supporters of new gTLD, and it is makes no sense.
The internet was not a commercial entity when .COM was introduced. People did not have widespread access to the internet for more than a decade after that.

New gTLD demand has been underwhelming to say the least. Pretty much every prediction made by a new registry has been far off from the reality.

The peak interest of an extension is normally at launch.
If you look at every recent extension introduced since 2002, TIME only brought value down, not up.

Brad

Thanks Brad for your contribution.
Have you heard about casino.online sale?
This gTLD domain sold for $201,250
Well that excites me!
What do you think about this?

 

[dordomai]

@dordomai Which upcoming extensions you are willing to invest?
any suggestions?

I don't have any. what are the better ones coming next?