The future of .COM after new gTLDs boom! Big DROP?!

[New.Life]

According to the data and this simple chart:

http://www.registrarstats.com/TLDDomainCounts.aspx

Is there a BIG drop? Coming soon?

 

[slader23]

Average joe reaction to eiurhieurhf.com:

what a sh*tty URL let's figure out what this is about.

Average joe reaction to wiourhowrhow.horse:

WTF does this mean???

Average Joe reaction to both domains:

WTF does that mean???

Stop trying to be smart. Its not helping you.

 

[dordomai]

Blanket statement. Since when is forex.trading or easy.credit a bad domain name?

It's bad not because it is a bad or a good domain but because most people don't even know that it is a domain!!

 

[slader23]

It's bad not because it is a bad or a good domain but because most people don't even know that it is a domain!!

Great comeback bro, still doesn't assess the fact that you used that article to make an illegitimate conclusion in an attempt to twist the reality of what is actually happening. So many examples that prove you wrong.

Let me give you one.

Division.Zone

This is the online community for players of the game division. It is run by ubisoft. Millions of gamers play this game. I'm sure many of its users don't know .zone is a ngtld but they go and spend hours communication in the community posting their thoughts. Also the .com does not resolve, which I think will be a new trend with developed ngtlds.

 

[dordomai]

Great comeback bro, still doesn't assess the fact that you used that article to make an illegitimate conclusion in an attempt to twist the reality of what is actually happening. So many examples that prove you wrong.

Let me give you one.

Division.Zone

This is the online community for players of the game division. It is run by ubisoft. Millions of gamers play this game. I'm sure many of its users don't know .zone is a ngtld but they go and spend hours communication in the community posting their thoughts. Also the .com is parked, which I think will be a new trend with developed ngtlds.

so one single websites proves that all websites will use nGTLDs? Makes a lot of sense... not.

Reality: websites that use nGTLDs are rare, 3 years after the launch. Websites that use nGTLDs and have traffic are even less common.

I don't see anyone of friends and family using them.. I don't remember when I used one the last time.

if they were to be shut-down and I didn't follow domains I wouldn't even notice.

 

[NameAcquisitions]

New gTLDs are great alternatives to .com... for end users that don't want to pay .com high prices. I don't think most new TLDs are great investment instruments for domainers. Here's why.

As we all know, making money in this industry is all about having and pricing inventory so that it moves above and beyond your maintenance costs. This is difficult for many investors to do with .com. The speculation difficulty will only increase when investing in new TLDs with higher renewal costs, and in a niche where buyers are expecting to register (not pay high prices) for their names... are already looking for alternatives.

I suspect the investment and end user high $$ will remain in .com for a very long time. That said, the great thing about domaining is that there are no set pricing structures in the resale market. You can make good money many places if you are smart/lucky enough.

 

[slader23]

so one single websites proves that all websites will use nGTLDs? Makes a lot of sense... not.

Reality: websites that use nGTLDs are rare, 3 years after the launch. Websites that use nGTLDs and have traffic are even less common.

I don't see anyone of friends and family using them.. I don't remember when I used one the last time.

You are not everyone, nor are you the voice for everyone. There are a number of examples and like I stated in my previous post Division.Zone was just one out of many. You sure like to twist peoples words, but with me at least it hasn't been successful.

 

[dordomai]

You are not everyone, nor are you the voice for everyone. There are a number of examples and like I stated in my previous post Division.Zone was just one out of many. You sure like to twist peoples words, but with me at least it hasn't been successful.

are you using websites that use them?

 

[wormfood]

Plus, I know about sales which are all private, non of them was public.

And no, people do not like to post about big gTLD sales..almost all of them are being done in private. There is too much competition there at the moment. Only 1 person who invest in gTLDs like to post his sales, and he is a nice exception

If there is too much competition, now I'm wondering why people don't just ignore any comments on namepros saying new TLDs suck.. Then you can have them all to yourselves. I guess because you think we are unconvinceable anyway so it doesn't matter. And you don't mind discussing it occasionally like me.

 

[slader23]

are you using websites that use them?

I don't need to use it to see the potential, when there is an opportunity you have to be there before everyone else otherwise the chance is lost. Which brings to light another illogical way of thinking which is you need to use something to see its value. In my opinion you need to see other people using it and see a need for future use.I did briefly use division.zone anonymously when I played the game on my brothers ps4, thats why I know of it because I used it to learn more about the game from others. I've got a few friends from uni who play the game and are active on the forum but I stopped playing early on, its not a very good game (Many thought it was a destiny killer) and I'm more serious about other things in life.

 

[Kate]

When considering how the Internet is transforming, anyone who thinks domains will be relevant in 20 years in a idiot in my book.

You could be surprised. After all the telephone numbering system is more than one hundred years old.
I think domain names are going to last for longer than you think. Part of the reason is the money invested in global branding, and also collective inertia. The telephone numbering system is still in place because a) it's not broken b) it would be expensive to replace it world-wide (this could be justified if we had to solve a problem, which one ?). On the other hand the underlying technology has changed enormously.

are you using websites that use them?

I think it's a relevant question. If you don't use them on a daily basis, or don't know people who do, then should you even bother...

 

[slader23]

You could be surprised. After all the telephone numbering system is more than one hundred years old.
I think domain names are going to last for longer than you think. Part of the reason is the money invested in global branding, and also collective inertia. The telephone numbering system is still in place because a) it's not broken b) it would be expensive to replace it world-wide (this could be justified if we had to solve a problem, which one ?). On the other hand the underlying technology has changed enormously.


I think it's a relevant question. If you don't use them on a daily basis, or don't know people who do, then should you even bother...

I answered his question. Find the your answer above. Also even though I did use it, I think "not bothering" when you don't know people that do is how people miss opportunities. Its a way of thinking that lacks logic and curiosity, to put it bluntly its a very "Inside of the box" way of thinking. I don't know anyone who buys guns or owns guns or even thinks about guns but if I saw Gun.Shop was available for a decent renewal, I'd grab it in a heartbeat. Your logic states I shouldn't even bother. The amount of fallacious thinkers on this thread is incredible.

 

[wormfood]

I noticed they forwarded TheDivisionZone.com to Division.Zone, not that that means anything. Looks like he registered them on the same day.
"The Division Zone is an unofficial, non-commercial fansite for the game Tom Clancy’s The Division.
The official site can be found here thedivisiongame.com."


I think if any of these do well, it will usually be the generic ones like .online, .web, maybe .xyz, though it sounds kind of unprofessional to me.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/report-completed-domain-name-sales-here.83628/page-467#post-5812992

Even if there are good examples of word.word sales and development, that doesn't mean a .word TLD can survive.. Maybe the TLD could survive, but there is still a pretty limited selection of perfect combinations to invest in for it to be worth arguing about.

Earlier, someone said something about people wanting to go global with their business and moving beyond their ccTLD, but that .com is too saturated for that. So sure, they might get a nice word.word for it occasionally, but generics are so much more flexible, so I think those TLDs will survive the longest, even though some domainers might make decent money from some word.word sales.

 

[slader23]

I noticed they forwarded TheDivisionZone.com to Division.Zone, not that that means anything. Looks like he registered them on the same day.
"The Division Zone is an unofficial, non-commercial fansite for the game Tom Clancy’s The Division.
The official site can be found here thedivisiongame.com."


I think if any of these do well, it will usually be the generic ones like .online, .web, maybe .xyz, though it sounds kind of unprofessional to me.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/report-completed-domain-name-sales-here.83628/page-467#post-5812992

Even if there are good examples of word.word sales and development, that doesn't mean a .word TLD can survive.. Maybe the TLD could survive, but there is still a pretty limited selection of perfect combinations to invest in for it to be worth arguing about.

Earlier, someone said something about people wanting to go global with their business and moving beyond their ccTLD, but that .com is too saturated for that. So sure, they might get a nice word.word for it occasionally, but generics are so much more flexible, so I think those TLDs will survive the longest, even though some domainers might make decent money from some word.word sales.

Look into the consumer choice model. .Com is very saturated and don't take my word for it this was said by the guy who made IDNX, Dr.Thies Lindenthal 3 years ago and he said this after tracking the domain market for years. The problem here isn't felxibility @Jaco the problem is price competition and ngtlds increase price competition by providing consumer choice within a saturated domain market, reducing the values of certain brackets of .coms. I have already stated this several times. So hopefully I don't have to explain this to you again. Also .Auto, .Condo, .Casino, .Money, .Cash there are hundreds of ngtlds that will be successful. There is too much variance to generalize on which ones won't and which ones will.

 

[S-B]

Average joe reaction to eiurhieurhf.com:

what a sh*tty URL let's figure out what this is about.

Average joe reaction to wiourhowrhow.horse:

WTF does this mean???

Disagree but anythonig .horse is a joke.

You could be surprised. After all the telephone numbering system is more than one hundred years old.
I think domain names are going to last for longer than you think. Part of the reason is the money invested in global branding, and also collective inertia. The telephone numbering system is still in place because a) it's not broken b) it would be expensive to replace it world-wide (this could be justified if we had to solve a problem, which one ?). On the other hand the underlying technology has changed enormously.


I think it's a relevant question. If you don't use them on a daily basis, or don't know people who do, then should you even bother...

My point is the Internet will primarily be controlled by voice commands within the next 20 years. Unfortunately, most will not say "APPLE DOT COM." In my opinion, Google will continue to dominate search and will simply serve up the most relevant sites for the query, which ultimately changes the importance of having a memorable domain. I would not be surprised if Google does away with search results entirely and instead sends you direct to the most helpful website. After all, a simple "next command" would suffice if that website does not help.

Domaining will die. The only question is when. Without that key piece information, I would be hesitant to heavily invest in the long-term.

 

[wormfood]

I meant .online and .web are more flexible because you can put anything to the left without it looking odd or sounding odd.. So this creates much more choice than a .anything TLD could.

You can cherry pick the few good-looking word.words all day and justify them.. but there are way more examples of how bad they will sound or not work.

 

[slader23]

I meant .online and .web are more flexible because you can put anything to the left without it looking odd or sounding odd.. So this creates much more choice than a .anything TLD could.

Sure there is more choice in those, but you also have to consider the power of keyword string ngtlds and brand-able keyword string ngtlds. You make a good point in regards to which ngtlds will be easier to adopt though, I'll give you that.

 

[dordomai]

Even if there are good examples of word.word sales and development, that doesn't mean a .word TLD can survive.. Maybe the TLD could survive, but there is still a pretty limited selection of perfect combinations to invest in for it to be worth arguing about.

Earlier, someone said something about people wanting to go global with their business and moving beyond their ccTLD, but that .com is too saturated for that. So sure, they might get a nice word.word for it occasionally, but generics are so much more flexible, so I think those TLDs will survive the longest, even though some domainers might make decent money from some word.word sales.

Agree with that and view this the same way. Some good word.word will sell but on overall there will not be that much development on these. Money will be made but it will be more like the .xxx or .mobi sales.

The number of good domains is limited and they are alternative choices not what the mainstream uses.

.web and .online and .xyz might survive and see some development. I don't think they will do better than .net simply because they aren't better and .net has the advantage of being the oldest and most established.

 

[168]

I only own selfemployed.net which i bought recently, can't think of any others off hand so i'm the wrong person to ask about .net sales but other more high profile names in the industry who own a ton of premium .nets have stated sales are way down and recently I think media options said the market for .net is all but dead at present.

I also feel contrary to what most people think, .i.e. that they prefer .net to all gtld's and as .nets are dead so therefore all gtld's are not worthwhile. That is a load of old rubbish if you ask me. .Net is a decent enough extension with end user appeal and acceptance but you simply can't compare most .nets to a name like forex.trading.

As an end user (I am an end user as well as a domainer) I would go for that all day long over forextrading.net if I had to pay a premium for the .net. If I can't get the .com i'll buy forex.trading all day long for $5k and not bother with the .net unless I could get it for reg fee, but I certainly wouldn't pay up for it.

Thus .net is down and unlikely to come back up to anywhere close to the 10% of .coms we sometimes saw in the past.

You would have never seen me stating these sort of views even a few months ago but times are changing.

Thanks for sharing what others are saying about .net sales and acknowledging a recent change in observation. I agree it's absurd to compare New "G"s to anything at this point.
I would take forex.trading all day long @ 5k , good buy. On a side note one can get a free .forex domain for 2 years as part of an innovators .program The yearly is at 1500.00 about the per month price of a 1 room office
I do believe there will be more thinning next year. Eyes wide open for opportunity !
Happy Hunting

 

[168]

I couldn't give a sh*t about .com. The market is slowing in general. I don't rely on domains for income at this point. This whole industry should be seen as a stepping stone to something better. When considering how the Internet is transforming, anyone who thinks domains will be relevant in 20 years in a idiot in my book. Unfortunately for you, it will take that almost that long for the general public to trust and accept them. So good luck with your fruitless endeavors.

Something we can agree on. The possibility of domains being irrelevant in 20 years. Something we don't agree on. As with all things
Tech 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 (yes arbitrary) today and that number will appear in July 2020. A fitting moment for hindsight. If your still around Q2 2020 let's talk. The (yes arbitrary) 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 (yes a more important number) and .com will be at approx. 50% active sites.
I really don't care to hear people blast me about "how wrong I am" It's what I see at this moment in time and I'm willing to put it out there.
Cheers

 

[168]

It's bad not because it is a bad or a good domain but because most people don't even know that it is a domain!!

"most people" don't need to know. Just the ones that can benefit. Like 2 people

 

[Ram G.]

Disagree but anythonig .horse is a joke.


My point is the Internet will primarily be controlled by voice commands within the next 20 years. Unfortunately, most will not say "APPLE DOT COM." In my opinion, Google will continue to dominate search and will simply serve up the most relevant sites for the query, which ultimately changes the importance of having a memorable domain. I would not be surprised if Google does away with search results entirely and instead sends you direct to the most helpful website. After all, a simple "next command" would suffice if that website does not help.

Domaining will die. The only question is when. Without that key piece information, I would be hesitant to heavily invest in the long-term.

I like your theory.

 

[168]

New gTLDs are great alternatives to .com... for end users that don't want to pay .com high prices. I don't think most new TLDs are great investment instruments for domainers. Here's why.

As we all know, making money in this industry is all about having and pricing inventory so that it moves above and beyond your maintenance costs. This is difficult for many investors to do with .com. The speculation difficulty will only increase when investing in new TLDs with higher renewal costs, and in a niche where buyers are expecting to register (not pay high prices) for their names... are already looking for alternatives.

I suspect the investment and end user high $$ will remain in .com for a very long time. That said, the great thing about domaining is that there are no set pricing structures in the resale market. You can make good money many places if you are smart/lucky enough.

Most reg fees will come down when the R&R's realize the investment community is just as important as end users. Right now it's more like Corps trying to sell individual stocks to "end investors" instead of going thru an established market. Kinda dumb. At some point they are going to need investors and additional product to maintain yr over yr growth especially if they are a publicly traded company. Of course they could branch out or consolidate. Consolidation is most likely at this point. Where do the loosers end up ? At a publicly traded company. Let the price wars begin! There may be a small few that stay above 100 yr for NEW regs if the market dictates. .com was at 100 yr now look where it is.
Even now I'm seeing a base settling in at 25-50 per year average. That should weed out the penny flippers and provide a more stable after market and retail pricing.
Happy Hunting!

 

[Brands.International]

If there is too much competition, now I'm wondering why people don't just ignore any comments on namepros saying new TLDs suck.. Then you can have them all to yourselves. I guess because you think we are unconvinceable anyway so it doesn't matter. And you don't mind discussing it occasionally like me.

Well, this is very good point. I will explain it to you as I have it personally:

On one hand, every time there is a huge stream of anti new gTLD posts in some threads on NamePros, I, and other gTLD investors, we actually have great buying opportunities here. I have bough lot of nice new gTLD domains from members here, for few bucks. People are dropping or selling very cheaply sometimes very good new gTLD names, often after they are reading posts from naysayers. They do not realize that those few people who are constantly posting anti new gTLD posts here are very biased. Nobody from them has any new gTLDs investments whatsoever, no experience, no contacts in this area, absolutely nothing. Just their opinions. Because, opinions are for free, aren't they?

As far as I know, one of them is actually sitting on very nice .com porfolio. Another one spent years to build large ccTLD portolio. There is also a guy who invested about year ago in new gTLD domains, but names he picked were simple one of the worst I have ever seen. He had to drop then all of them, and since then he is saying that new gTLDs does not work. Well it sure has not worked for him. I think my favorite from this small camp is a person who is for long time trying unsuccessfully selling somewhat obscure .link domain, while in parallel he is posting tons of gTLD bashing links in every thread he visits. While I fully understand incentives of other naysayers, I can not simply wrap my mind around this one, I simply does not understand it. But all is ok. I mean, I have my fun here, and I am buying very cheaply. This is one aspect of it.

On the other hand, there is something what is called a morale, or sense of community. If I would be driven only from opportunistic forces, I would join the naysayers and and start bashing too! But I like to also share information and enjoy the people here, and so I sometimes I get into discussions like in this thread, and say my opinion. I am persuaded 100% that new Gs are true opportunity for everyone, and I also believe one should be very careful to listen to people who are heavily investing in com or ccTLDs...do you really think that someone who spent years to build valuable .com portfolio will tell you ANYTHING nice about new gTLD domains which directly threats his or her own business? I particularly do not like some appraisals from senior members, when it comes to new gTLDs..just recently I saw new member here, joined day ago,, he posted pretty valuable new gTLD domains, very nice list..each of them can easily fetch few hundreds to low thousands even in solid new gTLD re seller market (I am not even speaking about end users here)..and what senior member told him (guy who is here from 2003!!!) - he told him his domains are of no value, and he should put them to auction starting $1 to basically get rid of them. If I see this kind of "advice", I interact, because it is a pure disgrace.

I am also biased, as you can see from my portfolio, as I am new gTLD enthusiast.
But, at least I tell it openly, and I do not go to .com and ccTLD threads, and spread my "valuable opinions" there.

So you see, it is kind of ambivalent position here. One one hand, gTLD bashing is great for purchases, but in parallel, one simply does not feel good to listen it all the time.

I hope it helped

 

[Dun]

Well, this is very good point. I will explain it to you as I have it personally:

On one hand, every time there is a huge stream of anti new gTLD posts in some threads on NamePros, I, and other gTLD investors, we actually have great buying opportunities here. I have bough lot of nice new gTLD domains from members here, for few bucks. People are dropping or selling very cheaply sometimes very good new gTLD names, often after they are reading posts from naysayers. They do not realize that those few people who are constantly posting anti new gTLD posts here are very biased. Nobody from them has any new gTLDs investments whatsoever, no experience, no contacts in this area, absolutely nothing. Just their opinions. Because, opinions are for free, aren't they?

As far as I know, one of them is actually sitting on very nice .com porfolio. Another one spent years to build large ccTLD portolio. There is also a guy who invested about year ago in new gTLD domains, but names he picked were simple one of the worst I have ever seen. He had to drop then all of them, and since then he is saying that new gTLDs does not work. Well it sure has not worked for him. I think my favorite from this small camp is a person who is for long time trying unsuccessfully selling somewhat obscure .link domain, while in parallel he is posting tons of gTLD bashing links in every thread he visits. While I fully understand incentives of other naysayers, I can not simply wrap my mind around this one, I simply does not understand it. But all is ok. I mean, I have my fun here, and I am buying very cheaply. This is one aspect of it.

On the other hand, there is something what is called a morale, or sense of community. If I would be driven only from opportunistic forces, I would join the naysayers and and start bashing too! But I like to also share information and enjoy the people here, and so I sometimes I get into discussions like in this thread, and say my opinion. I am persuaded 100% that new Gs are true opportunity for everyone, and I also believe one should be very careful to listen to people who are heavily investing in com or ccTLDs...do you really think that someone who spent years to build valuable .com portfolio will tell you ANYTHING nice about new gTLD domains which directly threats his or her own business? I particularly do not like some appraisals from senior members, when it comes to new gTLDs..just recently I saw new member here, joined day ago,, he posted pretty valuable new gTLD domains, very nice list..each of them can easily fetch few hundreds to low thousands even in solid new gTLD re seller market (I am not even speaking about end users here)..and what senior member told him (guy who is here from 2003!!!) - he told him his domains are of no value, and he should put them to auction starting $1 to basically get rid of them. If I see this kind of "advice", I interact, because it is a pure disgrace.

I am also biased, as you can see from my portfolio, as I am new gTLD enthusiast.
But, at least I tell it openly, and I do not go to .com and ccTLD threads, and spread my "valuable opinions" there.

So you see, it is kind of ambivalent position here. One one hand, gTLD bashing is great for purchases, but in parallel, one simply does not feel good to listen it all the time.

I hope it helped

Thanks for your input. One of the few statements I enjoyed reading through this post. Clean, simple, and free of unnecessary agitation.

keep it that way.

 

[168]

Disagree but anythonig .horse is a joke.


My point is the Internet will primarily be controlled by voice commands within the next 20 years. Unfortunately, most will not say "APPLE DOT COM." In my opinion, Google will continue to dominate search and will simply serve up the most relevant sites for the query, which ultimately changes the importance of having a memorable domain. I would not be surprised if Google does away with search results entirely and instead sends you direct to the most helpful website. After all, a simple "next command" would suffice if that website does not help.

Domaining will die. The only question is when. Without that key piece information, I would be hesitant to heavily invest in the long-term.

Google is probably already working on a way to maintain the ad cash cow in the voice scenario. Even with voice commands they will still have to have some kind of back end identifier or address to connect. for example: vertical platforms with thousands of "sites" residing @ one "address". I think Verisign just may test this theory with .web and take on Amazon and Ebay. Word press should have done this with .blog they could have become a mega media platform. Securing Platforms would also be much cheaper than trying to secure millions of individual sites and transaction fees will be much more lucrative than yearly reg fees all day long 24/7. Hmm maybe even no need for banks !
I would greatly appreciate other perspectives of how future scenarios could play out.
Cheers