.info The age old question, how do you calculate respective values .com/.net/.org/.info?

[TheBaldOne]

Haven't seen it in a while so was wondering how you all thought about the relative values of the gTLD's?

We all know this is not an exact science but talking about it regularly will hopefully perform the task of at least knitting our different views together on this matter.

I personally place them as follows:

.com
.net
.info
.org
.biz

Using the .com as a 100% value my general feelings are the respective values for the other suffixes are:

.com...100%
.net.....10-30%
.info.....3-15%
.org......1-10%
.biz......<1%-5%

There are such wide variations because of course one domain name may be particularly suited to the suffix in question whereas another is not really suited to the suffix at all.

Hyphens when used with multi-word or multi-character domain names also generally seem to distract from the value of most domain names. In todays market I reckon that they 'generally' detract from the value by anything from 50% to 80% of the value of the same but non-hyphenated domain name.

I would hope that as many fellow members take part in this thread so as we can at least get some form of understanding between us on the ranges involved. Remember there is no right or wrong view, just differing views.

 

[-REECE-]

.com...100%
.net.....5-15%
.info.....1-3%
.org......1-10%
.biz...... 0.1-0.5%

:imho:

 

[fenal]

While i understand its not something you can begin to get too specific on, may i ask how the next most important TLD, in most peoples eyes could drop to such a low percentage?

How is such a wide gap placed between .com and .net?

 

[npcomplete]

While i understand its not something you can begin to get too specific on, may i ask how the next most important TLD, in most peoples eyes could drop to such a low percentage?

How is such a wide gap placed between .com and .net?

The short answer: history.

Basically .net was restricted in the early days, and .com was open and targeted towards commerce, and of course commerce is where the money is.

Now .net is open, but it is too late and the momentum play favors .com. If anything, I think the 10% rule of net vs com is optimistic. Stick with .com if you can, but don't be shy about buying quality .net. I buy both when I can. Also, if you are into monetization, the .net is excellent. When I compare my .net/.com monetization, I have to say it is about 50/50 for the same domains keyword. In fact some of my .nets are making much more than the equivalent .com. Search engines do not discriminate as much between major extensions the way domainers do.

Marc

 

[fenal]

The short answer: history.

Basically .net was restricted in the early days, and .com was open and targeted towards commerce, and of course commerce is where the money is.

Now .net is open, but it is too late and the momentum play favors .com. If anything, I think the 10% rule of net vs com is optimistic. Stick with .com if you can, but don't be shy about buying quality .net. I buy both when I can. Also, if you are into monetization, the .net is excellent. When I compare my .net/.com monetization, I have to say it is about 50/50 for the same domains keyword. In fact some of my .nets are making much more than the equivalent .com. Search engines do not discriminate as much between major extensions the way domainers do.

Marc

Hi Marc

Its a very helpful explanation, i can now understand how such a distance was stretched between the two.

I agree, its much less important to the search engines, as you say they dont discriminate.

Your results from .net as you mentioned sound pretty good, i will keep that in mind.

Thanks

 

[TheBaldOne]

Technically there 'should' be no difference as far as a developed site is concerned, and Marc is spot on with his reasoning. Of course these days it is not just domainers who seperate value but also potential end-user developers as they realise that a significant number of internet users do type in a domain name with the .com suffix attached, thus by investing in the .com in preference to the .net they are in reality buying in built-in marketing.

Undoubtedly this will start to change simply because of the lack of availability of primary .com domains in comparrison to primary .net domains. The same can of course be forecast for the other gTLD's in the future (if the present system remains unaltered).

 

[npcomplete]

Technically there 'should' be no difference as far as a developed site is concerned, and Marc is spot on with his reasoning. Of course these days it is not just domainers who seperate value but also potential end-user developers as they realise that a significant number of internet users do type in a domain name with the .com suffix attached, thus by investing in the .com in preference to the .net they are in reality buying in built-in marketing.

Undoubtedly this will start to change simply because of the lack of availability of primary .com domains in comparrison to primary .net domains. The same can of course be forecast for the other gTLD's in the future (if the present system remains unaltered).

Excellent point. While the search engines do not as a general rule discriminate, the type-in users do. Type-ins for my monetized sites are overwhelmingly in favor of .com. My search engine traffic is about 50/50 between com/net for the same keywords.

Marc

 

[domainer50]

In my opinion you dont. You and everyone here might think its worth 1k. But you might get $500 for it. You have to go off what the market tells you.

 

[TheBaldOne]

Domainer50, are you saying there is no rough correlation between gTLD suffixes?