MKA
Established Member
- Impact
- 1,000
The .com is King. There's no discussion there. But one of the questions that occasionally pops up is, "if the .com is King, which extension is Queen?"
Of course, people's answers will vary influenced by niche and purpose. Some will say that it's .net or .org, others will say that it's .ai or .io for tech-related domains and .xyz for crypto-related projects, occasionally you see the .co being brought up, and of course the slew positively-perceived ccTLD:s (.ca, .de, .jp, etc.) if the project is regional.
Usually the above are backed by outlier sales, e.g. "this .ai domain sold for $100,000!" But if you examine the sales volume of .ai domains (whether it's the number of sales, or the sales total) you realize that it's very limited. If we limit our data to some samples then our understanding of the market will be skewed: The lottery isn't a profitable venture just because you have the occasional million dollar winner. Not to mention that a lot of these alternatives only sell because the .com is available as a future acquisitions.
But the noise in the arguments prove one thing: There's no Queen, or if there is she has no power. As have been pointed out before: No one aims for second place, no one remembers the second man on the Moon, etc. So as far as I'm concerned, there's no good reason for any start-up or expansion to acquire a non-.com. If it the .com isn't available then it's better to just take a step back and rebrand.
Of course, people's answers will vary influenced by niche and purpose. Some will say that it's .net or .org, others will say that it's .ai or .io for tech-related domains and .xyz for crypto-related projects, occasionally you see the .co being brought up, and of course the slew positively-perceived ccTLD:s (.ca, .de, .jp, etc.) if the project is regional.
Usually the above are backed by outlier sales, e.g. "this .ai domain sold for $100,000!" But if you examine the sales volume of .ai domains (whether it's the number of sales, or the sales total) you realize that it's very limited. If we limit our data to some samples then our understanding of the market will be skewed: The lottery isn't a profitable venture just because you have the occasional million dollar winner. Not to mention that a lot of these alternatives only sell because the .com is available as a future acquisitions.
But the noise in the arguments prove one thing: There's no Queen, or if there is she has no power. As have been pointed out before: No one aims for second place, no one remembers the second man on the Moon, etc. So as far as I'm concerned, there's no good reason for any start-up or expansion to acquire a non-.com. If it the .com isn't available then it's better to just take a step back and rebrand.
