.mobi Things we can all agree on... and in what camp do you fall?

[jeremyp]

I enjoy reading the various views on the mobi domain name extension.

There tends to be three distinct camps...

EXTREME OPTIMISM:
The extreme optimisim is often guided by those who would stand to gain tremendously by the success of the extension. Some of those with extreme optimism also tend to be quick to purchase sub-par .mobi domain names; Some have remarkable early-landrush portfolios.

EXTREME PESSIMISM:
The extreme pessimism is often driven by those who dismissed the extension early, invested little, and take the risk of missing the boat for the second time around. Some of those with extreme pessimism are already bitter that they aren't turning a quick buck on landrush purchases - and this fuels their fire.

MODERATE OPTIMISM:
Ironically, I find those who have invested the most in .mobi tend to have the most moderate views on the extension. We realize that mobile is coming in a big way and that .mobi could play a role as a very nice alternative extension to .com in the mobile web.

I fall toward the moderately optimistic side. I paid 6 figures on .mobi domain names. I've broken even with 95% of my inventory in tact... one of the best ROI in 6 months I've ever experienced. I'm going to hold tight for 5-7 years to watch the market materialize. If it materializes, even to an alterative extension status, this will be a multi-million dollar return.

WHAT WE CAN ALL AGREE ON:
There will be drastic changes in the way we currently use our mobile phone. Future generations of mobile will make current hardware look like transitional technology. Development, awareness and use of mobile applications and content are just around the corner. Use opportunities that none of us can currently foresee will launch billion dollar companies.

Will .mobi play a role as an alternative to .com? I believe that it will be a strong alternative extension. Give it 5-7 years...

Jeremy Padawer
www.jeremy.com

 

[texasgamer]

I have heard most of the pros and cons on dot mobi. I tend to side with the more positive arguments and for the success of dot mobi. Therefore I position myself somewhere between Moderate and Extreme Optimism.
I think society will embrace the dot mobi web. Less glitz and glamour, and more to the point, more on the go, faster and quicker! Mobi sites have less filler, less crap to wade thru. This is a positive! And people thought fast food restaurants would never work...
Godspeed mobi troopers, keep your cellphones charged and your websites developed

 

[newton]

Kudos for your post Boca. I didn't know that about Edelman. Excellent info!

To add to your thoughtful comments... I don't think anyone realizes how big Paypal.mobi is going to be. This is HUGE for the .mobi ext! Paypalmobile is pretty much the start of the global money exchange-via-mobile revolution. When Paypal advertises this feature on their site, eBay, the web, and (hopefully) on TV, this will create massive consumer awareness for .mobi.

On a side note .. There is even more good news with regards to paypal .. http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/spotlight-paypal-s-mobile-web-e-commerce-service/2007-03-26 and potentially not just good news for mobile but also for .mobi

Michael .. inciteful post and kudos to you

 

[snoop]

Most of the dot mobi names are not owned by those same dot-com-parked-page aggregators so the potential of their development into useful web sites is greater than that for the dot com domains.

Most .mobi's are owned by domainers, 95% won't ever be developed. You are arguing that because they have no traffic they will be developed, that simply isn't likely. Look at any new tld and you will see the % of parked domains is far higher than older extensions.

 

[name idol]

Most .mobi's are owned by domainers, 95% won't ever be developed. You are arguing that because they have no traffic they will be developed, that simply isn't likely. Look at any new tld and you will see the % of parked domains is far higher than older extensions.

snoop, I'll have to take your word for it - in terms of what you state as hard facts - since I don't have the empirical data to disprove any of that.

What I will say is that I don't really see what's wrong with either the simple logical statement made by acc, or with your own interpretation thereof, with both of which you seem to disagree.

This is the bit that I'm struggling with (I'm not maliciously quoting out of context, the full context is shown above - including the empirical correlation argument, which we can discuss separately in subsequent posts if you wish):

... You are arguing that because they have no traffic they will be developed, that simply isn't likely. ...

Are saying it's not true that there is less of an incentive to develop (properly) a domain that gets say 1,000 human visitors a year than one that gets 10 (assuming, for simplicity, that all else is equal)?

 

[snoop]

Are saying it's not true that there is less of an incentive to develop (properly) a domain that gets say 1,000 human visitors a year than one that gets 10 (assuming, for simplicity, that all else is equal)?

If a domain has no traffic that may serve as an incentive to develop.

Most domainers however sit on domains in the hope of resale or have development plans that never happen. For the average domainer with say a couple of hundred domains it is very unlikely that more than one or two names would ever move beyond parking or made for adsense type sites.

In terms of domains with traffic they are very often the types of domains that have a large amount of enduser interest. The idea that because an extension has no traffic that is likely to result in a greater level of development than extensions with traffic is flawed. The very reason why some extensions have alot of traffic is because of the widescale development that has occured.

 

[-db-]

The word of the day: empirical

snoop, I'll have to take your word for it - in terms of what you state as hard facts - since I don't have the empirical data to disprove any of that.

This is the bit that I'm struggling with (I'm not maliciously quoting out of context, the full context is shown above - including the empirical correlation argument, which we can discuss separately in subsequent posts if you wish):

-----------------------------------
empirical

em·pir·i·cal

1. derived from or guided by experience or experiment.
2. depending upon experience or observation alone, without using scientific method or theory, esp. as in medicine.
3. provable or verifiable by experience or experiment.

source: dictionary.com
-----------------------------------

So it has nothing to do with STAR WARS.

 

[name idol]

If a domain has no traffic that may serve as an incentive to develop.

Most domainers however sit on domains in the hope of resale or have development plans that never happen. For the average domainer with say a couple of hundred domains it is very unlikely that more than one or two names would ever move beyond parking or made for adsense type sites.

In terms of domains with traffic they are very often the types of domains that have a large amount of enduser interest. The idea that because an extension has no traffic that is likely to result in a greater level of development than extensions with traffic is flawed. The very reason why some extensions have alot of traffic is because of the widescale development that has occured.

Thank you for the clarification.

I can agree with what you are saying now, as long as it is confined to the pre-mobi extensions.

Here is the difference with .mobi (at least one obvious one):

- with all other extensions there is an expectation of filling up at least 1,000,000 pixels with professionally looking content that almost always has to have some design input. Knowing all about a specialist topic is in no way sufficient to create a proper site on that topic.

- with .mobi all you really need as a minimum is a few paragraphs of decent text content

I would hazard a guess and say that by the end of this year mobi content generation tools will be so ubiquitous that even the average domainer would have to have a very good excuse for not developing the majority of his/her .mobi portfolio.

 

[snoop]

I can agree with what you are saying now, as long as it is confined to the pre-mobi extensions.

Umm...no, my comments aren't confined to pre mobi extensions, .mobi will be no different, most domains are owned by speculators and won't be developed, thinking otherwise is kidding oneself.

 

[Traveler]

Umm...no, my comments aren't confined to pre mobi extensions, .mobi will be no different, most domains are owned by speculators and won't be developed, thinking otherwise is kidding oneself.

Yeah, most domains across al the extensions are owned by domainers. I doubt it will be different with .mobi.

I just hope they quickly work out whatever kinks there are in the RFP process to speed up the process of getting the best names into the hands of those with the ability and desire to develope them. In my mind that is one of the things that seperates this landrush from others, but I'm not impressed by how the RFP process is being handled up to this point.

 

[name idol]

Umm...no, my comments aren't confined to pre mobi extensions, .mobi will be no different, most domains are owned by speculators and won't be developed, thinking otherwise is kidding oneself.

We were almost there though.

I respect your heartfelt views - everyone is entitled to trust their intuition, sometimes at the expense of what may seem obvious to other people.

You may well be right in the end, who knows.

Having said that, do feel free to address the suggested reason why .mobi is different in this respect, whenever you feel like it.

 

[Binfus]

....Here is the difference with .mobi (at least one obvious one):

- with all other extensions there is an expectation of filling up at least 1,000,000 pixels with professionally looking content that almost always has to have some design input. Knowing all about a specialist topic is in no way sufficient to create a proper site on that topic.

- with .mobi all you really need as a minimum is a few paragraphs of decent text content

I would hazard a guess and say that by the end of this year mobi content generation tools will be so ubiquitous that even the average domainer would have to have a very good excuse for not developing the majority of his/her .mobi portfolio.

This is so true and the importance of this particular point is hard to over-emphasize. To put it another way: The amount of content of a typical parking page on the conventional web would be equivalent to having a pretty decent *developed* site in the context of mobile web (and .mobi)....the user expectation in the latter context would be vastly different, much narrowely focused, and limited than that of the traditional Internet. The conversion rate and revenue generation on properly oriented mobile sites is also likely to be much higher with the key here being *mobile oriented*.....IMO, many domainers have been making the fundamental mistake of borrowing value concepts from traditional web in registering .mobi names.

 

[snoop]

Having said that, do feel free to address the suggested reason why .mobi is different in this respect, whenever you feel like it.

A smaller screen size means less content but also and less opportunities, I don't see how development will be easier.

-How can .mobi sites be monetized?
-Are people able to develop sites that are really useful on the go?
-How can one effectively promote a site that may not be very effective on a traditional pc?

I'm sure there a lots of other considerations that could be brought up,

I'm not really interesting in discussing all this at length (since I'm sure the argument would go on forever) other than to say .mobi doesn't look like an obviously easier development route than any other extension to me.

 

[name idol]

A smaller screen size means less content but also and less opportunities, I don't see how development will be easier.

-How can .mobi sites be monetized?
-Are people able to develop sites that are really useful on the go?
-How can one effectively promote a site that may not be very effective on a traditional pc?


I'm sure there a lots of other considerations that could be brought up,

I'm not really interesting in discussing all this at length (since I'm sure the argument would go on forever) other than to say .mobi doesn't look like an obviously easier development route than any other extension to me.

Sure, we can park it for now

Here is just a quick answer to your first question:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070327/wr_nm/yahoo_mobile_advertising_dc_2

For those too sleepy to click, here are the key parts (my emphasis):

=============================================

Yahoo signs first partners in mobile ad push

By Eric Auchard 1 hour, 39 minutes ago

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Yahoo Inc. (Nasdaq:YHOO - news) on Tuesday will take the next step to bring advertising to mobile phones by offering publishers of Web sites aimed at cellphone users a set of tools for posting and managing ads via Yahoo.
ADVERTISEMENT

The Internet media company said it plans to offer what it calls Yahoo Mobile Publisher Services, a suite of services to place targeted advertisements in response to searches consumers perform on mobile Web browsers.

The company said beyond advertising that would run on its own Web pages, it is working with three initial partners with established mobile audiences.

The Yahoo Mobile Ad Network will include MobiTV, an early leader in delivering TV to mobile phones, Norway's Opera, whose browser is featured on many phones in Europe and Asia, and Go2, a U.S. yellow pages service for mobile phone users. The first ads will run in the second quarter.

"We started with text search on mobile phones, then we had display ads, now we have video and in-game advertising is next," said Marco Boerries, senior vice president of Yahoo's Connected Life business unit. "For the first time, mobile publishers have access to a big mobile ad network.

These services are aimed at advertisers, Web sites seeking to attract mobile phone users, as well mobile network carriers, the company said. Publishers can choose the ad formats they want to run ranging from graphical display -- or miniature banner ads -- to sponsored search links.

Sunnyvale, California-based Yahoo said it is introducing its mobile ad system in 19 countries, in a bid to convince its stable of big-name corporate advertisers that such ads will be seen by a broad-enough audience to make investment in them worthwhile.

...

More details are at http://mobile.yahoo.com/business.
=============================================

 

[acc]

Most .mobi's are owned by domainers, 95% won't ever be developed. You are arguing that because they have no traffic they will be developed, that simply isn't likely. Look at any new tld and you will see the % of parked domains is far higher than older extensions.

How can you say with certainty that 95% of the dot mobis will NEVER be developed. For one thing, 5000 of the names are premium names to be released by mtld.mobi - some through the RFP process to end users.

I think that you may have misunderstood my point. As I stated:

"... the newly arrived dot mobi, can be developed with new blood, with actual content ..... useful sites for the "page-consumer" when they need it and where they need it. Most of the [great] dot mobi names are not owned by those same dot-com-parked-page aggregators so the potential of their development into useful web sites is greater than that for the dot com domains."

Consider how many millions of one-word and multiple keyword dot-coms are tied up by parking conglomerates and serious independent domainers. Since their preferred income model is based on parked pages with PPC, etc. they will not be releasing those names into the marketplace in mass any time soon. Individuals can not develop sites on great keyword dot coms if they don't have the domains to work with.

It's not because the NEWLY minted dot mobis don't have traffic yet that they are more likely to be developed, it's because :
1. Great, single word dot mobis were available for registration by new blood.
2. Dot mobis are available on the market, not tied up because of their PPC.
3. Great dot mobis are affordable - unlike their dot-com older cousins.
4. This is a new market segment - the mobile space - open to fresh ideas, new players, and new energy.
5. 5000 premium names to be released by mtld.mobi - some through the RFP process to end users.
6. Most geographical names are held by the registry so they can direct how they will be developed.

What triggered me to make that post was my personal experience and evidence. That day I was going through a list of my dot mobi names starting with the A's. I was researching what website content was out there on the dot-com/net/org/info/us/de/co.uk versions of some of my mobi names. Search after search, name after name turned up mostly contentless, parked pages. That does not mean that all those keywords are not worth developing in any extension. It means that the owners of those names are satisfied with them being undeveloped.

So that presents an opening for mobi names to be different than the parked-other extension names. Developed = different. In addition to "mobile" focused being the main differentiator.

Only 450,000 or so dot mobis have been registered so far including all languages. I would venture to say that in the future, many more keyword dot mobi names will be regged by many different owners than the existing dot-com/net parkers. If the mobile ad space takes off then they will likely get into the act too. I believe that it is a good thing that in the first six months of mobi existence that the independents have had access and have been the buyers.

-acc

 

[snoop]

Consider how many millions of one-word and multiple keyword dot-coms are tied up by parking conglomerates and serious independent domainers.

You are missing exactly half of the picture with most of what you are saying, how many one and multiple keyword dot-com's aren't tied up through parking? How many of the ones currently tied up in parking will end out being developed?

Also you are going to look at the parking situation for .com then you need to do it for .mobi and other extensions also. How .mobi will never be developed because the owners are simply waiting for a resale opportunity?

Instead of,

"1. Great, single word dot mobis were available for registration by new blood."

a better statement of the situation would be,

"1. Great, single word dot mobis were available for registration by new blood, they were registered mainly by speculators and most will never be developed."

 

[acc]

Dot Mobis are accessible, thus more likely to be developed

I am NOT missing the point. Many good generic dot-coms are developed. I see them. My statement was that a large percentage of them are NOT developed, but parked, and THOSE will likely stay that way. The real fact is that all those parked dot-coms have been in such a parked-PPC-page mode - for many years. That IS their history. As far as stating as fact that 95% of the mobis will NEVER be developed, one can not claim as fact something which has not been proven.

My personal observations tell me that of the good generics, the dot-coms are developed far more often than the other extensions, net/org/info/us/biz,etc. - more often yes - but not to the extent that they should be to guarantee a satisfying user experience for your average web surfer looking for quality content and information.

If an end user wants to acquire one of those decent generic dot-coms to build a content-rich and useful website, they have to wrangle it out of the hands of the owner. As the history of parking income is used to feed the entrenched mindset that a many-year-multiple of PPC income sets the price range of a domain, then you know how expensive it is for a person or business with interest in a subject area to buy any really good dot-com.

On the other hand, since the dot-mobis just came out six months ago - they are still VERY AFFORDABLE, thus ACCESSIBLE. For example, let's say that a decent tier-2 dot-com can be had for $100,000. That same dot mobi can likely be bought today for under $5,000. Top-tier dot-coms that would sell for low $x,xxx,xxx or high $xxx,xxx put them out of the range of most everyone. Those same names in dot-mobi can or will be available for a fraction of that price. A down-to-earth example may be that a two-keyword dot-com can be had for $10,000 and that same dot-mobi probably could be had for $xxx-$x,xxx - and there is a fair chance that it has not even been registered yet.

We all have to watch and see how the mobile web develops (we can all agree that it IS happening and will accelerate), how dot mobi will be accepted as the word gets out to the general business and public (it is still too early to claim any result as fact), and how many of them actually do get developed (also still too early to say).

Getting back to the OP's original questiuon: - my optimism is driven by these points:
1. The mobile web is just now starting out. It is a brand new slice of the ever-expanding internet pie and it is accelerating by the day.
2. Dot Mobi has positioned the extension to be mobile-accessible, a planned and concentrated attempt to tie dot-mobi DIRECTLY to the new mobile web, and as such useful in the eye of the general public.
3. The orchestrated rollout by mtld.mobi (still in the first quarter of the game), expanding development support (dev.mobi), and promotion is unlike anything seen with other extensions.
4. Mobile internet will be used worldwide thus Dot-Mobi can be sold world-wide.
5. A business or person, can go out today and still acquire a really good dot mobi for a really good price relative to what they would have to pay for the same name in dot-com. They may still even get fine multi-generic-word dot-mobis for reg fee.
6. As evidenced by members here at NP, the owner-excitement of the potential development of dot-mobis by their owners is unlike that seen with other tlds.

Best of luck to all mobi owners and developers - and to all NPers, regardless of extension preference.

-acc

 

[Pred]

I am NOT missing the point. Many good generic dot-coms are developed. I see them. My statement was that a large percentage of them are NOT developed, but parked, and THOSE will likely stay that way. The real fact is that all those parked dot-coms have been in such a parked-PPC-page mode - for many years. That IS their history. As far as stating as fact that 95% of the mobis will NEVER be developed, one can not claim as fact something which has not been proven.

My personal observations tell me that of the good generics, the dot-coms are developed far more often than the other extensions, net/org/info/us/biz,etc. - more often yes - but not to the extent that they should be to guarantee a satisfying user experience for your average web surfer looking for quality content and information.

If an end user wants to acquire one of those decent generic dot-coms to build a content-rich and useful website, they have to wrangle it out of the hands of the owner. As the history of parking income is used to feed the entrenched mindset that a many-year-multiple of PPC income sets the price range of a domain, then you know how expensive it is for a person or business with interest in a subject area to buy any really good dot-com.

On the other hand, since the dot-mobis just came out six months ago - they are still VERY AFFORDABLE, thus ACCESSIBLE. For example, let's say that a decent tier-2 dot-com can be had for $100,000. That same dot mobi can likely be bought today for under $5,000. Top-tier dot-coms that would sell for low $x,xxx,xxx or high $xxx,xxx put them out of the range of most everyone. Those same names in dot-mobi can or will be available for a fraction of that price. A down-to-earth example may be that a two-keyword dot-com can be had for $10,000 and that same dot-mobi probably could be had for $xxx-$x,xxx - and there is a fair chance that it has not even been registered yet.

We all have to watch and see how the mobile web develops (we can all agree that it IS happening and will accelerate), how dot mobi will be accepted as the word gets out to the general business and public (it is still too early to claim any result as fact), and how many of them actually do get developed (also still too early to say).

Getting back to the OP's original questiuon: - my optimism is driven by these points:
1. The mobile web is just now starting out. It is a brand new slice of the ever-expanding internet pie and it is accelerating by the day.
2. Dot Mobi has positioned the extension to be mobile-accessible, a planned and concentrated attempt to tie dot-mobi DIRECTLY to the new mobile web, and as such useful in the eye of the general public.
3. The orchestrated rollout by mtld.mobi (still in the first quarter of the game), expanding development support (dev.mobi), and promotion is unlike anything seen with other extensions.
4. Mobile internet will be used worldwide thus Dot-Mobi can be sold world-wide.
5. A business or person, can go out today and still acquire a really good dot mobi for a really good price relative to what they would have to pay for the same name in dot-com. They may still even get fine multi-generic-word dot-mobis for reg fee.
6. As evidenced by members here at NP, the owner-excitement of the potential development of dot-mobis by their owners is unlike that seen with other tlds.

Best of luck to all mobi owners and developers - and to all NPers, regardless of extension preference.

-acc

excellent post
rep added
:tu:

 

[GijsZePa]

I'm a Moderate Optimist..

The problem I have is that almost 99% of my portfolio are keywords in my native language. Although the dutch market is a very good market and the .nl extension is in the top 15 of the world (quantity). The dutch .mobi market hasn't started yet. Some nice sales (dokter, apotheek > 5000) but for the rest...it's quiet..

I think we (non english owners) need to have some more patience as the owners of english keyword.

Martin

 

[snoop]

On the other hand, since the dot-mobis just came out six months ago - they are still VERY AFFORDABLE, thus ACCESSIBLE. For example, let's say that a decent tier-2 dot-com can be had for $100,000. That same dot mobi can likely be bought today for under $5,000. Top-tier dot-coms that would sell for low $x,xxx,xxx or high $xxx,xxx put them out of the range of most everyone. Those same names in dot-mobi can or will be available for a fraction of that price. A down-to-earth example may be that a two-keyword dot-com can be had for $10,000 and that same dot-mobi probably could be had for $xxx-$x,xxx - and there is a fair chance that it has not even been registered yet.

The problem is the $5000 .mobi will be in an unknown extension, it is no more affordable than a weaker term in .com. "Keyword.mobi" and "keyword.com" are in different price brackets because they are in different quality brackets!

In terms of newer extensions the choice will be between stronger term in a lesser known extension or a weaker term in a better known extension. Don't just think about keyword in isolation whn you consider affordability, think about how well known both the keyword and the extension is.

 

[acc]

You have to think going forward - Dot Mobiville is just being settled

arnie - thanks for the rep, glad you understand my point.

The problem is the $5000 .mobi will be in an unknown extension, it is no more affordable than a weaker term in .com. "Keyword.mobi" and "keyword.com" are in different price brackets because they are in different quality brackets!

You have to consider this discussion in terms of things going forward - not just what they are today - only six months into a new extension, focused on a newly emerging mobile space. Again, one can not really argue as fact that .mobi will be an unknown entity forever. What do you say about .de and .co.uk? They were introduced after the com/net/org triad and have gained wide acceptance and enjoyed nice price appreciation in their niche markets. Dot mobi has the potential to be a much bigger - worldwide - market.

A story might help explain my point about dot mobi's place and value in the expanding online "real estate".

-- Welcome to Mobiville --

Consider the hypothetical bedroom community twenty years ago where Family A bought a nice 1-family house on 1/2 acre lot in Comtown for $50,000 (Comtown land was worth about $10,000 an acre at the time). This was a well established, quiet town where only a few decent homes were available for sale every year. It was nice to be in town, close to schools and shopping.

Twenty miles away out in the then so-called "boonies", a developer bought out a thousand acre farm just off the highway and put up lots for sale in a new place called Mobiville. Family B thought about their options and decided to pick up a 10 acre plot for $10,000 and put up a nice 3-bedroom house for $40,000. All ten acres were buildable land, with scenic views, and good drainage. Land was relatively cheap in Mobiville back when it first became available because many people thought it was too far to drive out to. It was situated out in a beautiful, scenic valley but "nobody" wanted to live there because nobody lived there ... yet.

Family C were part-time, novice realestate investors who at one time or another in the past owned fixer-uppers in Euville, Bizberg, Infoville, and a timeshare in IDeeEn which they rarely used anymore. They were friends with Family B so they saw how Mobiville was growing but they waited until they saw story after story on the local news about people moving out to the suburbs before they made their move. They got in late and also bought a 10 acre plot with house for a total price of $50,000 - but it included 8 "brandable" acres of wetland.

The economy grew and inflation did what it normally does. Real estate prices rose in the Comtown and in the entire region. As suburbia expanded and the more new communities sprouted, Family B's land also grew in value. They lived where many people now wanted to live, because as Mobiville grew, malls and restaurants and Little League fields sprang up to meet the demand.

Today Family A's property and house sells for $600,000 ($300,000 for the house and $300,000 for the half acre of land). Family B's house which is as nice as Family A's house, is worth just a little less but their acreage is valued much more. ($200,000 for the house and 10 x $100,000 per acre for the land for a total of $1,200,000). Family C's house like Family Bs is worth $200,000 but their land holdings are worth much less - 2 x $100,000 per acre plus 8 x $10,000 per acre for the "brandable" wetlland which nobody seems to want - for a total of $480,000).

Who made a good investment? They all did. How good depends on what the needs and wants of each family were at any given time and their indicidual visions of the future. All three Families can be happy. Family B enjoys their visits with friends in Comtown but they know that they can sell off a couple acres, pay for their kids' college educations, and still have a very nice comfortable place to live.

Our Dot Mobiville was a brand new piece of online real estate opened up to the public in the fall of 2006. The infrastructure is in place to support many large planned communities. Main roads already connect Dot Mobiville and other similar places to the main highway (the Gore SuperDuperHighway) and neighborhoods are developing, one house at a time. Community centers are being built by Mobiville Dev Corp and neighborhoods are being developed by independent contractors - like vcool, aggieuk, arnie, etc. Many other new residents hold optimistic views of the future of Mobiville and the entire region.

P.S. A rare snail thought to be near extinction, Utoobius voyeurus, was reportedly seen in the "brandable" wetlands owned by Family C. They were the talk of the town for awhile until the little creatures showed up in all the nearby Meetoo swamps. Family C still pays property taxes on their 8 acres of wetlands every year and they are planning an amphibian petting zoo to make use of the land. Also, they never used their timeshare property.

-acc