STATE OF THE NEW G'S

[Internet.Domains]

The current STATE OF THE NEW G'S is good!...or is it?

After nearly 3 years into the introduction of New G's there remains:
* Very low 'End User' usage
* Very little aftermarket activity
* Declining inquiries
* Inconsistent registry changes affecting drops, renewals and pricing
* Little to none public awareness

In conclusion, the current STATE OF THE NEW G'S is not good.

(Disclaimer: I am a proponent and investor of New G's, but I tend to have a REALIST view of things)

 

[Alessandro Couteau]

The problem is people are looking at Gtlds as just any other Internet domains for investment ...

When a large majority of you here want absurd amounts of money for Gtlds, millions to boot ... It's too early for names to be seen in that resolve !

We need to build out Gtlds as reputable companies that stand by their integrity just as .com was being born & built when Frank and Rick we're investing ! That's the only thing that needs to be happening, development will take care of marketing and sooner or later, common consumers will see this change, as it's actually going on today, and will adapt to a new way of marketing ... In the form of Internet Realestate ...

If you don't have the funds to build out a Gtld then you should not be investing ... This is not a "quick" get rich scheme ! This is patience at its finest, understanding the market from both perspectives as well as understanding why serious .com investors will never buy into Gtlds !

It's a matter of patience and some people will call me a hypocrite for pricing some of my Medical Gtlds at $100,000 USD and declining offers that are a fair amount for Gtlds but I look at the value of names by their build out factors ! Traffic ! Potential revenue, which is staggering for my examples ... I don't look at names as investor resells but enduser sales ...
If an investor is both an enduser and investor then that's a plus imho !

I have too many projects on my hand to be dealing in the Medical Industry ~ so I will also be building out some of my Gtlds to promote the effort of development !

But realistically there is too many examples of non development, laziness, shortage of funds, family trouble, whatever it may be, we must protect our rights as investors and be prepared for whatever is necessary to catapult this industry to the next level, aka Gtlds and development of such ...

A truly perfect example is Net.Work selling for $100,000 USD
Yet there is still no active site ??? Then again maybe they are building it out, I cannot say for sure ... My only point is we need to focus on development not investing ...

It's our jobs to make the value rise,
And whining about a $500 YR renewal is humorous to say the least ...
When you reach the peak of $5000 YR renewals per domain, then it's gone too far and it's easy to just avoid the name until the price drops, it will. It always does. Time and time again we have same numbers fluctuate because of less demand and too much supply !

This message goes out to Gtld investors who understand this :

Whatever Gtlds you currently have in your portfolio, focus on your top 3, maybe even just 1 ... 1 powerful name that could cost you a couple thousand dollars to build a business but in the long run, could generate you hundreds of thousands in investment return through the power of development ... That's when we will see Gtlds grow in value ! Make no assumption, these are names that have powerful meaning ! I am not taking about names like,

FriedRice.BlackFriday

They need to be powerful names ! If you don't know how to tell a powerful Gtld and you're tired of getting slammed in the appraisals thread by only serious .com investors, message me or any other serious Gtld investor like Ali Zandi
...

Development = Desire

Best,

Alessandro

 

[Kate]

Allegations and predictions:

• .com is overcrowded
• you can't get a good .com without spending millions
• new extensions will provide unprecedented choice and abundance of keywords to the masses
• in 3-5 years new extensions will be mainstream

And always the same worn-out arguments:

• too much money has been invested in new extensions for them to fail
• they are backed by major companies including Google (a .mobi backer)
• new extensions are fresh and cool
• they are the future

Reality:

• New extensions are not getting much traction with end users.
• Majority of people are not familiar with them/don't understand them/don't trust them
  
• They are far from mainstream: sure we may see them in the wild from time to time but often do you use them ?
  
• Legacy extensions like .com and ccTLDs remain dominant.
• Registries are struggling financially.
• Many registries reserve lots of keywords and sell inventory at 'unorthodox pricing', they behave more like domainers than neutral registry operators, end users don't benefit.
  
• The future of new extensions is not even guaranteed in the long term: it should be expected that under-performing extensions will be retired in the future, wiping out branding and development efforts made by end users who bet on the wrong .horse
  
• Sponsors of gTLD are losing faith and interest: twenty corpTLDs have already been retired/abandoned
• New extensions shine in spam and abuse reports

End user demand is always overestimated, always. Domainers too always tend to overestimate end user demand for premium domains. Even good names are hard to move for their 'true' value (vs perceived value).
There are now hundreds of new extensions to choose from, but many are so niche that they can only attract limited numbers of registrations anyway.

Of course hindsight is 20/20 but the outcome was predictable and will become more obvious as time goes by.
Disclosure: I have zero interest in new extensions and never registered any.

 

[HotKey]

Absolutely on point! - Well said @Alessandro Couteau
If anyone of you wanted some solid advice regarding nGTLD's this is it right here folks!...

Agreed- it's always refreshing to read his posts.

There is no reason to compare .com and it's adoption rate to the New G's. At the time .coms were affordable or unknown, not that many people had the internet or were even aware of the internet. Today billions of people have the internet and you would be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't know about it. For that reason comparing .com and it's adoption rate to the New G's is a non variable.

Your right. It wouldn't be a fair comparison. Look what the G's are up against:
- An established internet, already deeply rooted in .com
- Cheap registration prices for .com
- A large part of the netizen populace believing .com is the internet.
- And many who should know better, not embracing the new G's, thereby diminishing positive awareness and adoption.
- Unorthodox pricing
- Competing TLD's? 6 Trillion, 700 billion, 501 Thousand.

What was dot-com up against?
- This new Internet thing, an exciting new frontier. How to do it? Why, get yourself a .com. Why wouldn't you?
- Total competing TLD's? 3.

To expect the same adoption rate as the early birds just doesn't make sense. The state of the new G's is like the a slow-brewing coffee..that first cup always makes the wait worthwhile. And because it is such a slow brew...personally, I find it kinda cool to be able to watch it unfold. The world is too caught up in now now now rush rush rush.

 

[Kate]

Domain investors who have been in the game for a long time have amassed a large portfolio of .com / .net / org domains and in the past were in a comfort zone and could dictate or demand their prices because if the domain was taken in a .com/.net/.org/.info /cctld then that was it...

Comfort zone is certainly a factor, but investors like to diversify and explore new opportunities. Just because you made money on .com, doesn't mean you can't see opportunities elsewhere. Frank Shilling is testimony to that. But of course he is in a very special position on top of the food chain.
I am not saying you can't make money on new extensions, but my personal determination is that the risk/reward ratio is not worth it for me. At some point speculation becomes gambling when the odds of a sale are too remote.

The introduction of nGTLD's has taken away this comfort zone, no longer are people forced to pay whatever price the seller demands...They have something that they never had before... OPTIONS!..

People have always had options, even before new extensions were released. Some projects were set up on .io .co .me etc

In theory, more extensions = more options, but in practice there are not so many more viable options available. Because a lot of extensions are only suitable in a narrow niche. If you are in financial services for example, .xyz .club .tech .hiv .vin .desi .horse .auto etc are useless. Only the more generic extensions or those related to your industry can be possible options.

So, just because we now have hundreds of new extensions, doesn't mean we also have hundreds of new options available, not at all. There is more choice but not as much as people think.

they have the option of a few good nTLD's at a much much lower price than the .com equivalent.

As long as their choice of domain is not reserved, is not hoarded by the registry or a domainer, and is not premium-priced... Reality is quite different, as everyone has realized.

Registries are behaving like domainers, pursue adverse pricing policies and are not always acting in a predictable manner (desperation ?). Some registries are taking back dropped domains into the pool of reserved domains. Those names are not going to benefit end users if they aren't available.
What the registries are doing is send end users back to square one. If you can't get a name in a new extension or need to buy it at a premium, and possibly pay expensive renewal fees, then why bother ? Never mind that the stated purpose of new extensions was to avoid this situation right ?

This is the reason they need to constantly protect their portfolios by putting down nGTLD's.

As if end users were consulting domainers before choosing their domain names...
Personally I have noticed that people who invested heavily in new gTLDs are sometimes defensive. When you criticize new extensions , it's because you are 'trying to protect interests' and you are a hater (or a dinosaur stuck in the past), you cannot be objective and your opinion doesn't count. I can understand their distress when they hold large portfolios with expensive renewal fees and zero sales

From the perspective of an end user, new extensions can have benefits (if you can get a suitable domain for a moderate fee). From the perspective of a domainer it's another story.

TL;DR version: new extensions haven't made much progress in 3+ years. I think they will always remain marginal oddities due to lack of critical mass, low profile vs the accumulated mass of old extensions.

 

[deez007]

I am not saying you can't make money on new extensions, but my personal determination is that the risk/reward ratio is not worth it for me.

This is exactly my point that I have been trying to harp on for ages now....lol - Yes, for you the risk/reward is not worth it. However, we are human beings and we all have different views on risk and risk aversion. We all have different circumstances, different business models, different objectives so to some people the risk vs reward makes perfect sense. Which is why I keep telling everyone to just drop it....stop arguing and let it be...some people like nGTLD and some people dont.. it is what it is.

People have always had options, even before new extensions were released. Some projects were set up on .io .co .me etc

In theory, more extensions = more options, but in practice there are not so many more viable options available. Because a lot of extensions are only suitable in a narrow niche. If you are in financial services for example, .xyz .club .tech .hiv .vin .desi .horse .auto etc are useless. Only the more generic extensions or those related to your industry can be possible options.

This also comes down to something many of use have been saying for a while also... you can not have a blanket rule for all nGTLD's - yes some are just down right cr@p and even the good ones, people need to apply common sense and logic when registering them. I mean stuff like Donkey.forex is just not going to work. When I say more options..I'm talking high priced premium domains like for example forextrader.com / net that would be out of reach to many people in terms of price and they could never own them because of that...but now they can grab something like forextrader.online - an option that was not available before... also .co and .io etc..were originally ccTLD's and I knw from first hand experience back then even when they were no longer considered ccTLDs they still lost significant ground when it came to SEO and ranking..so owning a domain like BuyForex.co at the time was not going to outrank buyforex.com for US traffic... (I'm talking about back in the day) however now with nGTLD's they are SEO friendly.

As if end users were consulting domainers before choosing their domain names...
Personally I have noticed that people who invested heavily in new gTLDs are sometimes defensive. When you criticize new extensions , it's because you are 'trying to protect interests' and you are a hater (or a dinosaur stuck in the past), you cannot be objective and your opinion doesn't count. I can understand their distress when they hold large portfolios with expensive renewal fees and zero sales

From the perspective of an end user, new extensions can have benefits (if you can get a suitable domain for a moderate fee). From the perspective of a domainer it's another story.

I don't think there are many who are solely invested in nGTLD's - there might be a handful. I myself have more .com's and ccTLD's than nGTLD's ... Yet I am a huge fan of nGTLD's ....I even have a few really really good ones that are not listed on any marketplace at all..because they are not for sale at the moment....I will sell them down the line. My point is that chances are the people standing up for nGTLD's are more likely in my shoes as well..they have a diversified portfolio. However the pro .com folks simply own .com's they don't own any nGTLD's so they have far more to lose from nGTLD's taking off than the average person who is pro nGTLD's.

Yes, from the end user perspective new extensons makes sense.... to me, thats all that matters...end user perspective. Once we have a stronger uptake from end users, then domainers will simply have to follow what the market demands....

Also, too many domainers are stuck in domainer mentaltity. This is why I say not all domainers are entrprenuers....from a business perspective, like I have said before...assuming this is a start up with a budget... lets say they can buy Shoesonline.com for $150 000 or they could buy Shoes.online for $10 000 ....from a business perspective shoes.online makes more sense..... buy shoes.online and invest the additional $140 000 in marketing the business and brand... instead of buying the .com alone for $150k and then still having to fork out an another $150k on marketing and branding. ... Shoes.online will be way better ROI

 

[garptrader]

Where is the best risk-adjusted ROI for an investor?

Typical .COM portfolios turn low single digits annually and renewals are under $10 each. Acquiring good .COM domains can be challenging and expensive. End users are more likely to be willing to pay a premium for a .COM than other TLDs but quite often are not willing to pay more than low $XXX.

Typical legacy alternative TLD portfolios have even lower turn and end user prices tend to be rather low. .Net / .Org renewals are cheap and acquisition costs much lower than .COM. Selling .Net domains is tough and I quit considering .Net acquisitions a long time ago.

Aftermarket new TLD portfolio turn is at a crawl and renewals quite often are more expensive than .COM domains. Some nTLD combinations have good search volume. However, end users still are reluctant to pay serious money for them.

Perhaps none of the above scenarios is particularly attractive. An alternative might be to take one solid domain (regardless of TLD) and turn it into a business. Then you don't have to waste time trying to do outbound marketing to end users who just don't get why they should pay more than $25 for a domain name.

 

[slader23]

Regardless of whatever's been said here between us, I still highly respect both @Kate , @dordomai and @Bram C. 's opinions. Apart from NGTLD's I think your all very knowledgable experts in your respective niches.

 

[Kate]

I believe in long-term investments but not those that materialize long after your death

 

[Internet.Domains]

Personally, I would consider you a valuable Gtld investor ! But you and I both know how many names are out there with a lack of quality ! It's almost ambarassing to see the horrendous amount of junk Gtlds ... It makes change difficult !

Thank you!...In all fairness 'junk' domains are not limited to the New G's. There is tons of 'junk' in .com as well...

 

[Alessandro Couteau]

 

[deez007]

You guys forgot to add:

• Domain investors who have been in the game for a long time have amassed a large portfolio of .com / .net / org domains and in the past were in a comfort zone and could dictate or demand their prices because if the domain was taken in a .com/.net/.org/.info /cctld then that was it... there was no hope of owning the domain unless you paid whatever price the seller wanted to sell it for. The introduction of nGTLD's has taken away this comfort zone, no longer are people forced to pay whatever price the seller demands...They have something that they never had before... OPTIONS!.. they have the option of a few good nTLD's at a much much lower price than the .com equivalent. This is the reason they need to constantly protect their portfolios by putting down nGTLD's. This is exactly why Mike Mann goes around saying cr@p like nGTLD's have zero value and are not worth investing in. Off course he has to say that, he has a few thousand .com domains that he has spent years investing in, he has to protect that investment.

• Again, let me stress that I am not at all saying that they have the same value as a .com but they offer options. Just because the uptake has not been as fast as many have hoped does not mean it's destined to fail.

 

[168]

Kate says,
"Of course hindsight is 20/20 but the outcome was predictable and will become more obvious as time goes by".
"I have often said that the rise of ccTLDs has nullified the case for new extensions"
What facts do you have to back this worn out assumption ?

Kate, with all due respect, "And always the same worn-out arguments"
"Majority of people are not familiar with them/don't understand them/don't trust them"
What facts do you have to back this worn out assumption ?

What you think is predictable based on your history is irrelevant to today's market. A Global market. Massive expansion of verticals that didn't even exist before now, Going "digital" no longer an option, Business cycles, relevance. Some .commies just don't get that.

I would suggest the rise of ccTLDs +hacks has demonstrated the willingness to adopt anything other than a second rate crappy .com left over or an outrageous "Premium" .com out of reach for 80% of the market.
It's been reported several times relevance is what consumers want in today's market. The most important factor New "G"s have over what's left in irrelevant "legacies"
In 3 years .com has lost nearly 30% of the startup market and that's primarily the US market! The rest of the world is following.
This is what will become more obvious as time goes by. Startups choosing to use "risky relevance"
Startups thrive on risk Hellooo. .com is "old" world and on the down side of the business cycle. "Growth" has peaked. Roi has peaked. Technology changes and .com is not immune.
ROI is the only thing that matters to an investor. .Com is moving to the downside. even the "Premiums"
Please as I have asked you before, go save all the dumb ass corps that have poured more than a billion into the NEW "G"rowth.
Have you contacted them yet?
People keep suggesting you might want to broaden your homework a bit instead of using the same old worn out arguments that you post on every New"G" discussion.
Venturing out into the unknown isn't your thing. We get it. New "G" discussions aren't for bashing or reiterating the same old worn out arguments. Innovators have no use for yesterday.
We are here to discuss the growth of the entire industry. All inclusive. Team work. Innovation. New approaches.
What's working, what isn't.

Moores law is in effect. Adoption and growth will be twice as fast as the legacies so if you know your domain history that
calculates out to in about 7.5 years from the start. There will be 3 times the number of New "G"s reg'd today and that number will appear in July 2020. 60m+ A fitting moment for hindsight. If your still around Q2 2020 let's talk. The numbers have nearly doubled every year since the roll out and there always are periods of adjustment and pause in between in any market.. Approx 30% will be active sites.
There is just no way .com leftovers/ccTLD's can accommodate "relevance" "Verticals" in a global market. Especially markets that are 3 times the size of the .com revolution.
Happy Hunting!

 

[Alessandro Couteau]

Alessandro,
YES!
"I look at the value of names by their build out factors ! Traffic ! Potential revenue"
Land is valued by the same. This is the best way to value domains
YES!
"we need to focus on development not investing ..."
Development is part of the next gen in domains. Just a few will last you a lifetime!
YES! -
"That's when we will see Gtlds grow in value ! names that have powerful meaning !"

What's your focus on New "G"S? 1word ? killer combos? chinese?
Happy Hunting

Thanks ! I am happy to know that some people actually take time to read a valuable post filled with relative information into making the new generation of Internet domains and Gtlds what we all hope it to be ...

With that being said I invest in big keywords, single keywords which have sold for seven figures plus,
Also I invest in only industries that are high paying ! Worth the wait

Build out one or two Gtld's out as a business or business' and become the enduser and from this we will see growth in the Gtld Market ...

Don't hold your names, waiting for someone to build out their names to grow the value of your names. And don't wait for some enduser to call and offer you a pile of money ! You'll be waiting a long time unless some development starts to happen ...

 

[The Durfer]

 

[Internet.Domains]

 

[deez007]

The problem is people are looking at Gtlds as just any other Internet domains for investment ...

When a large majority of you here want absurd amounts of money for Gtlds, millions to boot ... It's too early for names to be seen in that resolve !

We need to build out Gtlds as reputable companies that stand by their integrity just as .com was being born & built when Frank and Rick we're investing ! That's the only thing that needs to be happening, development will take care of marketing and sooner or later, common consumers will see this change, as it's actually going on today, and will adapt to a new way of marketing ... In the form of Internet Realestate ...

If you don't have the funds to build out a Gtld then you should not be investing ... This is not a "quick" get rich scheme ! This is patience at its finest, understanding the market from both perspectives as well as understanding why serious .com investors will never buy into Gtlds !

It's a matter of patience and some people will call me a hypocrite for pricing some of my Medical Gtlds at $100,000 USD and declining offers that are a fair amount for Gtlds but I look at the value of names by their build out factors ! Traffic ! Potential revenue, which is staggering for my examples ... I don't look at names as investor resells but enduser sales ...
If an investor is both an enduser and investor then that's a plus imho !

I have too many projects on my hand to be dealing in the Medical Industry ~ so I will also be building out some of my Gtlds to promote the effort of development !

But realistically there is too many examples of non development, laziness, shortage of funds, family trouble, whatever it may be, we must protect our rights as investors and be prepared for whatever is necessary to catapult this industry to the next level, aka Gtlds and development of such ...

A truly perfect example is Net.Work selling for $100,000 USD
Yet there is still no active site ??? Then again maybe they are building it out, I cannot say for sure ... My only point is we need to focus on development not investing ...

It's our jobs to make the value rise,
And whining about a $500 YR renewal is humorous to say the least ...
When you reach the peak of $5000 YR renewals per domain, then it's gone too far and it's easy to just avoid the name until the price drops, it will. It always does. Time and time again we have same numbers fluctuate because of less demand and too much supply !

This message goes out to Gtld investors who understand this :

Whatever Gtlds you currently have in your portfolio, focus on your top 3, maybe even just 1 ... 1 powerful name that could cost you a couple thousand dollars to build a business but in the long run, could generate you hundreds of thousands in investment return through the power of development ... That's when we will see Gtlds grow in value ! Make no assumption, these are names that have powerful meaning ! I am not taking about names like,

FriedRice.BlackFriday

They need to be powerful names ! If you don't know how to tell a powerful Gtld and you're tired of getting slammed in the appraisals thread by only serious .com investors, message me or any other serious Gtld investor like Ali Zandi
...

Development = Desire

Best,

Alessandro

Absolutely on point! - Well said @Alessandro Couteau

If anyone of you wanted some solid advice regarding nGTLD's this is it right here folks!...

 

[Alessandro Couteau]

Allegations and predictions:

• .com is overcrowded
• you can't get a good .com without spending millions
• new extensions will provide unprecedented choice and abundance of keywords to the masses
• in 3-5 years new extensions will be mainstream

And always the same worn-out arguments:

• too much money has been invested in new extensions for them to fail
• they are backed by major companies including Google (a .mobi backer)
• new extensions are fresh and cool
• they are the future

Reality:

• New extensions are not getting much traction with end users.
• Majority of people are not familiar with them/don't understand them/don't trust them
  
• They are far from mainstream: sure we may see them in the wild from time to time but often do you use them ?
  
• Legacy extensions like .com and ccTLDs remain dominant.
• Registries are struggling financially.
• Many registries reserve lots of keywords and sell inventory at 'unorthodox pricing', they behave more like domainers than neutral registry operators, end users don't benefit.
  
• The future of new extensions is not even guaranteed in the long term: it should be expected that under-performing extensions will be retired in the future, wiping out branding and development efforts made by end users who bet on the wrong .horse
  
• Sponsors of gTLD are losing faith and interest: twenty corpTLDs have already been retired/abandoned
• New extensions shine in spam and abuse reports

End user demand is always overestimated, always. Domainers too always tend to overestimate end user demand for premium domains. Even good names are hard to move for their 'true' value (vs perceived value).
There are now hundreds of new extensions to choose from, but many are so niche that they can only attract limited numbers of registrations anyway.

Of course hindsight is 20/20 but the outcome was predictable and will become more obvious as time goes by.
Disclosure: I have zero interest in new extensions and never registered any.

Kate,

I don't think it's surprising the amount of forethought you put into your "argument" and "speech" that's indicative of someone here who just wants to debate ...

Your whole "allegations" and "predictions" ; not sure why you decided to insert that into your opening, as only 1 of those was mentioned and that was in regards to specific domains that are perfect match and have been invested in by some of the biggest and brightest companies in the world ... And no were not discussing Google !

What I suggest you really do, is actually read what everyone said here before you start to cause a ruckus to feed your pride !

We discussed the development and the overall stage of which investors must become endusers and better communicate new ideas to the future consumers of the world ...

In my own curiosity, I bet you're the same individual who would say other life does not exist outside of earth ... And that humans will always rule the earth please correct me if I am wrong

Best,

Alessandro

 

[eurorealtor]

Why would end user want to pay $xxx / renewal year after year for the new GTLD, if they can pay $xxx per decade for .com? I do have very few new "premium" Gs and it's really annoying to pay $80 to $200 per year for renewal. Wondering why I still keep them...

 

[dordomai]

Well lets look at it like this.

Business.com vs Business.global

Business.com - purchase price: $150 000 (that was back in 1997) + 10 years renewal ( $100) that = $150 100 for total cost of ownership over 10 years.

Business.global - purchase price: $25 000 (in 2016) + 10 years renewal (.Global uses normal renewal even for premium domains - $60 on average) thats $600 = $25 600 for total cost of ownership for 10 years.

Business.com = $150 100
Business.global = $25 600

and business.global sucks while business.com is a stellar domain name.

 

[slader23]

http://startupleague.online/

Thought some of you might like this initiative by Radix:

The Startup League is a unique initiative which rewards our most promising, early-stage startup clients. It is a program designed to provide a wide range of support, through a bouquet of free goodies, marketing support and sponsorships.

Startups using the following new top-level domains are eligible:

.tech .space .online .store .press .host .site .website



Anyone that is my age (20-25) and is just entering the domaining world understands the value in .coms but also realizes that for our generation its not whats going to be driving the domain markets further. NGTLD's are what people my age will be using and apart from the issue of name collisions this adoption, although many investors in .com may not want it to happen, will be continuing to proceed through a logical plot line, @168 provided a very clear and statistically driven timeline that I believe isn't very far off from being a near perfect prediction of whats to come, 2020 is the big year. The rigidity and incredibly high prices on premium ngtlds is a defensive strategy deployed by registrars to get rid of domainers, in other words, they not only want bake the cake...they want to eat it too. However, after a few years of testing this its become clear to some registrars (like .Club) that their expectations($$$$) and their pricing ($$$$) do not resonate nor comply with the current risk appetites of both end users and domainers alike. This has caused the more activist/forward thinking registrars to make price corrections and in some cases entirely eliminate/reduce premium pricing on domains they previously held, as well as reduce renewal fees. .Com will be unable to compete with this as their renewal prices will remain fixed at $7.85 until 2024.


If every ngtld had streamlined registration and renewal fees below $10, with no registry held premiums or registry held premiums in the sub 1k range with regular renewals, .com premiums would have devalued in price at an alarming rate because such immense price competition would create a huge correction in the values of premiums all across the board. This isn't the case in the current market but renewal costs and the prices of registry held premiums will continue to go down deep into the early 2020's for ngtlds.

This will be the death of .com IMHO...not now but in the coming future:

End User: If I could get Data.Center for $50k at regular renewals of $13.99 in comparison to DataCenter.com for $850k and a slightly cheaper renewal cost ($8), I'd pick the 1st one because not only am I getting a great name I'm also saving money on dev, marketing and maintenance costs as well as being in line with the standard renewal costs of a legacy tld. The person squatting on the .com will not have the same level of resources and as search algorithms evolve the traffic loss will lessen and eventually be completely elimated reducing the perceived advantage of having a "COM" to the right of the dot.

New Gen Domainer: If I could get Data.Center for $50k-$100k at the standard renewal price for my registrar, knowing that in a few years time the renewal price will be close to .com in comparison to DataCenter.com for $850k-$1.5 Million and the same/similar renewal cost then I will hold my ngtld to the Nth year and then execute price arbritrage testing the market for every year I own the name, until I can sell at a desirable profit (200%+) and leave room for the next guy to profit as the prices of new gtld premiums appreciate.

As long as the price of a premium ngtld is lower than the .com the ngtld domainer will benefit greatly due to the inefficiency in price. However, this kind of arbitrage will not last very long as legacy .com owners will be forced to bring down the prices of their premiums to remain competitive. This is how equilibrium will be found as one comes up the other must go down, correcting until they meet.

Ex.
Year 2017
Data.Center Renewal ($13.99)
$50k
DataCenter.com(Standard Renewal)
$1.5Million

Year 2018
Data.Center Renewal($13)
$100k

DataCenter.com (Standard Renewal)
$1.3Million

Year 2019

Data.Center($11) <----Agressive Renewal Price reductions begin
$200k

DataCenter.com(Standard Renewal)
$1.1 Million

Year 2020
Data.Center (Renewal $10)
$375k

DataCenter.com(Standard Renewal)
$900k

Year 2021

Data.Center(Renewal $9)
$550k

DataCenter.com (Standard Renewal)
$800k

Year 2022

Data.Center(Renewal $8.5 PRICE STABILIZES)
Price $650k

DataCentre.com(Standard Renewal)
Price $750k

Year 2023

Price Arbitrage for NGTLD domainers ends, New GTLD adoption completes. The end result will be reduced prices for domain names across ALL levels.

After this point .COM's will become less valuable than comparable new G's, this will happen near the end of their current price contract with ICANN in 2024.



Full Disclosure: I am 90% invested in .coms, the ngtlds I do hold however, are all long term positions and I will be continuing to add more in the coming months. I look for dropped ngtld premiums and occasionally purchase registry premiums that maintain regular renewal costs (no more than .IO renewal costs). I plan to reduce my portfolio size to 30 domains by the end of 2017 15 will be .com (a mixture of liquids and non english premiums) and 15 will be high quality ngtlds (I currently own emd ngtlds like Rapid.Repair and Fishing.Tools but I'm looking for better ones). I consider my cctld portfolio (.ca, .co.uk,.tv)to be a separate asset class. My plan isn't entirely rigid because...the future is uncertain but good balance will be beneficial in the long run.

 

[Bram C.]

Nope... you comparing a two word domain with a single word domain. So your comparison is not correct. I am also basing my figures on actual sales figures as per namebio... business.com sold for $150k and business.global sold for $25 000

BusinessGlobal.com is a 2 word domain.
I consider Business.Global a 2 word domain as well.

BusinessGlobal.com and Business.global use the exact same keywords after all. The only "advantage" Business.global may have over BusinessGlobal.com is that its 3 characters shorter. But if almost nobody knows it's a real URL then what do these 3 characters matter? I wonder what would happen if you would ask 100 random people in the street to go to the website "business dot global"? I have a feeling many of those will end up at either businessglobal.com or business.global.com.

Besides isn't that the whole point of most new gTLDs to start with? To find some keyword combination before and after the dot that makes sense? But in your example the right of the dot is conveniently left out so you can come to the conclusion that the one-word domain business.com will be more expensive.

The way I see it: Business.com is a truly premium domain, business.global however is as "premium" as BusinessGlobal.com would be. Anyone could have told you that an ultra premium domain such as business.com will always be more expensive (and valuable) compared to a domain such as Business.global, and this without looking at any sales data.

Imo Business.global should be compared to BusinessGlobal.com, and not Business.com. It would for example make little sense for a pizzeria business serving pizzas in a local town area to use a domain like Pizza.global.

So let's do the math using some actual namebio sales data:

BusinessGlobal.com vs Business.global

BusinessGlobal.com - purchase price: $3,688 (Sold in 2008) + 10 years renewal ( $90) = $3,778 for total cost of ownership for 10 years.

Business.global - purchase price: $25 000 (in 2016) + 10 years renewal (.Global uses normal renewal even for premium domains - $60 on average) thats $600 = $25 600 for total cost of ownership for 10 years.

BusinessGlobal.com = $3,778 (and with $9 yearly renewals from that point on)
Business.global = $25,600 (and with $60 yearly renewals from that point on)

If I was an end user I would know what domain I would take.

 

[168]

there would be 50/50 people preferring nGTLDs vs .com or even the majority preferring nGTLDs over .com because they are cheaper.

in reality, at least for startups it is something like 97% non-nGTLD vs 3% nGTLD.

The crowd decides that they don't like them. Despite nGTLDs costing much less.

I know why the crowd don't like them:

Word.Word is NOT better than WordWord.com
Text.Brand is NOT better than brand.com
Text.Word is NOT better than word.com
You can't advertise them in the real world. A large percentage will not get word.word while everyone gets Word.com
Unpredictable renewal prices, you don't know who is behind the extension. Will they still be around a few years from now?
Everyone is either under .com or ccTLD making a business under word.word seem like a pink zebra.

Nailed it.
The market is sayin ".coms are over priced!
Startups are sayin "something else will do.! 68%
Investors are sayin " Yahoo, more inventory that's actually relevant!
There are provisions for extensions that fail.
First, all registrars are required to post bond money to operate 3+ years after fail
Second, in some cases they will be absorbed by bigger players.
The true failures, there is not a person on this planet that doesn't understand there will be, and innocent people will loose.
Just business, just life.

"Can't advertise them' ? That's just lame.

"The crowd decides that they don't like them".
How can they when you have declared they don't even know about them?
Pulp Fiction
Happy Hunting

 

[deez007]

Tell you what Deez, this "fighting" contributes to nothing. Let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

HAAHA dude.... please read my reply like earlier on this thread to sooo many people.. thats what I have been singing the whole time... it is what it is, some like nGTLDs and some dont like nGTLD's and each have their own merits

 

[mad409]

If we were at a bar I'd still by you all a round of drinks... Agree, or disagree...

Either they succeed within the next few years or never. That is my guess.,

That's my plan... Now let me buy you a drink...