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)

 

[Internet.Domains]

 

[168]

66% (+12%) of new domains are Operating at LOSS.

99% of start ups operate at a loss. Companies listed on the stock market operate at a loss. America is currently operating at a loss.

for the first time in .com history re-sale losses are adding up. Check Namebio

So what's your point ? Do you work for Verisign?

Happy Hunting

 

[Alessandro Couteau]

 

[168]

Haven't seen you on the cannabis or dog thread.

 

[mad409]

I also think development is the key, sites like this one is what is helping spread the word.

http://vitality.bio/

As more launch public awareness becomes greater and advertising spreads by word of mouth and through their marketing efforts..

 

[Alessandro Couteau]

"Haven't seen you on the cannabis or dog thread. "

Sometimes you don't have to support every niche and I was a little disappointed that the owner of Marijuana.com didn't want Kush.com for $420,000 #WeedMaps

 

[168]

"Haven't seen you on the cannabis or dog thread. "

Sometimes you don't have to support every niche and I was a little disappointed that the owner of Marijuana.com didn't want Kush.com for $420,000 #WeedMaps

I would have passed at that valuation too. After all why buy kush when shrooms went for 94k. (and they last longer)

Comp Stats suggest as a niche product value between 130-200k. It also has meaning for China but wouldn't get close to the value here.
This is definitely one to develop to get full value.
I picked up a few shorts in .dog for the MJ market I look forward to see if they are adopted.
Cheers

 

[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!...

 

[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]

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.

 

[mad409]

Disclosure: I have zero interest in new extensions and never registered any.

Really? LMFAO!

 

[Asfas1000]

end users who bet on the wrong .horse

Epic !

 

[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.

 

[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

 

[deez007]

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

And if it there was life on other planets and they had the Internet then they would be buying .com's also!

 

[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

 

[Cdomains]

The registries behind these new extensions have put a ton of money into them and are not going to give up so easily.

I think 95% - 98% will disappear within the next 5 to 8 years.

Dot coms aside, very few will be as successful as dot nets, orgs and the other old school extensions.

If the big players like Godaddy keep advertising them and putting them in their registration path this will move things along quicker.

It will take more time though.

Hard to tell at this point.

Could be 3 - 5 years for some.

Could be 10.

I think the buyers for these new tld's will be younger, newer users who don't have a strong connection to the older extensions.

Older folks who were weaned on dot com, org, etc. since the beginning, will feel less sure about the new gtld's, at least for a while.

Once they catch on this will slowly change.

 

[Kate]

The above comment is very reasonable.
But I don't think 95% of new TLDs will disappear. Even zombie extensions can be profitable as long as there are enough registrations (even defensive/idle/speculative registrations etc, doesn't matter).

I have often said that the rise of ccTLDs has nullified the case for new extensions, because many nations have in fact been moving away from .com for years. The shift begin more than a decade ago. The US is the only major country that shuns its own TLD, so the US-centric mentality that prevails here is very much about .com vs non-.com.

In countries that have mature extensions, not using the local ccTLD can be challenging because it goes against consumer expectations. Unsurprisingly there is limited interest in new extensions, besides most are English strings anyway and even more 'alien' than .com.
Even regional extensions with a clear focus like .paris or .berlin aren't performing well. Because they somewhat compete against the national extension.

Yes, I know I repeat myself often
It is very hard to break the established consensus and there are too many assumptions about how consumers will/should react (wishful thinking).

 

[Cdomains]

The above comment is very reasonable.
But I don't think 95% of new TLDs will disappear. Even zombie extensions can be profitable as long as there are enough registrations (even defensive/idle/speculative registrations etc, doesn't matter).

I have often said that the rise of ccTLDs has nullified the case for new extensions, because many nations have in fact been moving away from .com for years. The shift begin more than a decade ago. The US is the only major country that shuns its own TLD, so the US-centric mentality that prevails here is very much about .com vs non-.com.

In countries that have mature extensions, not using the local ccTLD can be challenging because it goes against consumer expectations. Unsurprisingly there is limited interest in new extensions, besides most are English strings anyway and even more 'alien' than .com.
Even regional extensions with a clear focus like .paris or .berlin aren't performing well. Because they somewhat compete against the national extension.

Yes, I know I repeat myself often
It is very hard to break the established consensus and there are too many assumptions about how consumers will/should react (wishful thinking).

Interesting perspective!