What is a 'Defensive Reg'?

[hawkeye]

I noted this in another thread, but I think it needs further discussing - 'What is a Defensive Reg?'

A lot of people here like to automatically jump on the 'it's a defensive or protective reg' bandwagon. Any mention of the usage by someone or some company using a new extension (say like .mobi for an example in this question), brings this same comment, and by so many. So perhaps those here with 'all knowing domaining insight', can explain the meaning of 'defensive' or 'protective' reg. As it's quite easy to research and note, that these same companies have not regged their names, or put a site, or even redirected, in the other extensions that have been out for years! Are all the other extensions pointless? Why would a company, no, 'many companies', just pick .mobi to reg 'defensively' and put a site up? We all know that TM issues, makes this a mute defense, though some may reg a TM, most don't. Or are these the 'only' companies that someone 'might' reg in a .mobi? And if .mobi is headed to failure, as so many knowledgeable domainers say, are they also saying that these companies aren't as 'smart' or 'insightful' with their college bred employees and multi-million dollar budgets, to see the same things as a domainer who can reg a $7 name?

So WHY would a company only reg 'one extension' to defend themselves against. And WHY is it only in .mobi?? Seriously, can anyone logically answer this without an 'extension opinionated' reply'??

 

[Rubber Duck]

You can tell whether it essential to their marketing strategy if you see it on Billboard, in a Newspaper or on Telly. If it appears in none of these places it may well just be a defensive registration, but in any event it matters not because it is not entering the joint public consciousness, therefore it might as well just not exist at all.

For an extension to thrive many many companies need to be promoting the extension and branding it in their URL. If that is not happening then the extension is not happening. Period.

I noted this in another thread, but I think it needs further discussing - 'What is a Defensive Reg?'

A lot of people here like to automatically jump on the 'it's a defensive or protective reg' bandwagon. Any mention of the usage by someone or some company using a new extension (say like .mobi for an example in this question), brings this same comment, and by so many. So perhaps those here with 'all knowing domaining insight', can explain the meaning of 'defensive' or 'protective' reg. As it's quite easy to research and note, that these same companies have not regged their names, or put a site, or even redirected, in the other extensions that have been out for years! Are all the other extensions pointless? Why would a company, no, 'many companies', just pick .mobi to reg 'defensively' and put a site up? We all know that TM issues, makes this a mute defense, though some may reg a TM, most don't. Or are these the 'only' companies that someone 'might' reg in a .mobi? And if .mobi is headed to failure, as so many knowledgeable domainers say, are they also saying that these companies aren't as 'smart' or 'insightful' with their college bred employees and multi-million dollar budgets, to see the same things as a domainer who can reg a $7 name?

So WHY would a company only reg 'one extension' to defend themselves against. And WHY is it only in .mobi?? Seriously, can anyone logically answer this without an 'extension opinionated' reply'??

 

[Keith]

I'll tell you this...a defensive reg is not one which gets developed. Especially if the space which it is developed for is unique, delivering content in a way different from traditional web addresses.

 

[hawkeye]

You can tell whether it essential to their marketing strategy if you see it on Billboard, in a Newspaper or on Telly. If it appears in none of these places it may well just be a defensive registration, but in any event it matters not because it is not entering the joint public consciousness, therefore it might as well just not exist at all.

For an extension to thrive many many companies need to be promoting the extension and branding it in their URL. If that is not happening then the extension is not happening. Period.

So it's fair to say that since we are not seeing IDN's on billboards and newspapers or 'telly' that they also 'are not entering the public consciousness and may as well not exist' either??

 

[Rubber Duck]

So it's fair to say that since we are not seeing IDN's on billboards and newspapers or 'telly' that they also 'are not entering the public consciousness and may as well not exist' either??

Well, you would not expect to see them in America.

It is not uncommon to see sites branded with IDN.com that they don't even own. In some case I actually own them. One word Generics of course.

Yes, they are promoted, but companies have been hesistant to allocate their promotion budgets when they still won't resolve for the majority of users because Microsoft have failed to get a latest generation browser to market. With IDN supporting browser now gaining traction and the launch of IDN TLDs and the associated publicity, there is going to be a lot of competition to get market share and the publicity required is inevitable. IDN also get substantial traffic. Not enough to retire on but very significant nevertheless.

 

[Name Trader]

I thought a defensive reg was when you owned the .com and regged the .net and/or .org so that nobody else could impinge on your domain name. Not to get too esoteric.

 

[Jeff]

'What is a Defensive Reg?'

In the case of the "dot Mobey", it's protecting their established brand / ™ ... and, with or without the undisclosed urging and/or assistance of mTLD and .MOBI Enthusiasts™, tossing up a cursory "mobile website" and then not substantially promoting it other than to have one or two poor souls post its link and respective make-your-own "Press Release" here and on the various domainer forums! :red: :imho:

Far cry diffrent from the - NONE AS YET - developments and promotions of actual GENERIC terms / "reserved" domains (for instance, those that would have been RFP'd and that were auctioned -wtih mandates - at Traffic and Seo), IMHO. :gl:

PS. This belongs in the #1 Namepros .MOBI Forum©, as well! :talk:
-Jeff

 

[hawkeye]

Good grief Jeff, more of your mumbo jumbo, anti mobi crap. So you're one-sided 'opinion' is simply saying that 'defensive regging' only applies to .mobi?!!??

And no it doesn't belong in the mobi section, as 'defensive regging' should apply to all extensions!! Or is it just an anti-mobi comment?

 

[Jeff]

I introduced and qualified my statement and OPINIONS above with, "In the case of the "dot Mobey" ... ", specifically. Plus, your also specifically referenced .MOBI in the O.P., as well!

Good day, friend.
-Jeff

 

[Rubber Duck]

It probably applies more to Dot Mobi, because in many cases the dot Nets and dot Orgs are already gone. Most companies won't employ lawyers unless they feel they have a problem.

To me, it matters not whether it is defensive registration or a revenge shag, unless big companies start promoting these in the same way they they promote their existing dot coms, the whole thing is going nowhere.

The other problem is that it is starting to all get way too complicated. If you have a smart phone, depending on how smart your phone actually is, then use our dot com as normal, for all other phones you will be directed to the M subdomain of our mainsite , but it that doesn't redirect within 5 seconds or it doesn't render properly try typing in again using our alternative dot Mobi address, where you will be directed to a stripped down version of what you actually wanted to see in the first place.

 

[Keith]

It probably applies more to Dot Mobi, because in many cases the dot Nets and dot Orgs are already gone. Most companies won't employ lawyers unless they feel they have a problem.

To me, it matters not whether it is defensive registration or a revenge shag, unless big companies start promoting these in the same way they they promote their existing dot coms, the whole thing is going nowhere.

The other problem is that it is starting to all get way too complicated. If you have a smart phone, depending on how smart your phone actually is, then use our dot com as normal, for all other phones you will be directed to the M subdomain of our mainsite , but it that doesn't redirect within 5 seconds or it doesn't render properly try typing in again using our alternative dot Mobi address, where you will be directed to a stripped down version of what you actually wanted to see in the first place.

That sounds like alot of work to me. First try .com...oh it's too slow. Next try m.whatever...doh that does'nt render properly either. Finally, go to the one that we all know will work the first time, every time if all else fails (.mobi). You've just stated the exact reason .mobi is needed without even knowing it

Good thing mobi is "stripped down" so that the consumer can get what they need quickly and efficiently. No need to spend half the day scrolling and zooming a .com to find what you need.

Some people miss the point of the mobile web. It's not to bring full blown pages with tons of info to the consumer. It's all about getting necessary info to the user in a timely manner!

 

[Rubber Duck]

Some people miss the point of the mobile web. It's not to bring full blown pages with tons of info to the consumer. It's all about getting necessary info to the user in a timely manner!

Which is all very well if that is what the consumer wants, but the indications are that it is not. All the traffic appears to be coming in on iPhones to dot com sites. That tells me that people are prepared to pay substantially more to get the full browsing experience but few are prepared to tolerate a pale shadow of the real thing.

Furthermore Opera Mini will bring the full experience to just about any phone now and is soon to be joined by a version of Firefox that will work on any phone.

Even Google is in on the act. Mobi just isn't needed. These browser are also very fast because the bulk of the programmes and processing power are at the other end. They don't rely on your crappy old phone being able to work it out all on its own.

 

[Keith]

Which is all very well if that is what the consumer wants, but the indications are that it is not. All the traffic appears to be coming in on iPhones to dot com sites. That tells me that people are prepared to pay substantially more to get the full browsing experience but few are prepared to tolerate a pale shadow of the real thing.

The iphone represents a tiny portion of mobiles worldwide. Traffic stats from that one source are meaningless IMHO. Now if the majority had iphones or devices like it, you would have an argument.

BTW, how many people have actually "paid more" for the full browsing experience. Not many in comparison to the number of mobiles in circulation to date.

 

[Rubber Duck]

It is not the total number of phones that is relevant. It is the total number of phones being used to browse that is important. The statistic show that most of these are smart phones. The other are just not used. I don't use mine. I would not pay the connection charges. If I decide that is what I need, then I will get myself a smart phone.

Anyway, what happen to the Dot Mobi button that was supposed to come as standard on evey handset?

 

[hawkeye]

Which is all very well if that is what the consumer wants, but the indications are that it is not. All the traffic appears to be coming in on iPhones to dot com sites. That tells me that people are prepared to pay substantially more to get the full browsing experience but few are prepared to tolerate a pale shadow of the real thing.

Ok, so there's a billion or so mobile users out there. If the iPhone were to sell maybe 5 million a year, in 10 years WOW 50 million people would be able to surf the net freely!! And for those that want to note other phones, collectively if they sold 50 million phones yearly for 10 years, only a half a billion people could still not surf freely! However, the next 3-4 years of mobile surfing is the issue that needs to be addressed currently, however it's done.

And still no one can define a 'defensive reg' other than as 'an excuse' to dismiss .mobi??

 

[Keith]

It is not the total number of phones that is relevant. It is the total number of phones being used to browse that is important. The statistic show that most of these are smart phones. The other are just not used. I don't use mine. I would not pay the connection charges. If I decide that is what I need, then I will get myself a smart phone.

Anyway, what happen to the Dot Mobi button that was supposed to come as standard on evey handset?

The number of phones is absolutly relevant. The majority do not surf the mobile web because .com sites are simply too hard to access and do not render properly. This is why .mobi is so important.

The iphone is nice, don't get me wrong. It's just that the majority around the world cannot afford one or a device like it. By the time pricing on these phones comes down, it will be too late. Mobi will already be branded as a household name...it's gaining exposure daily.

I'm holding onto pushbutton.mobi just in case that mobi button ever makes the cut

 

[Ross]

That sounds like alot of work to me. First try .com...oh it's too slow. Next try m.whatever...doh that does'nt render properly either. Finally, go to the one that we all know will work the first time, every time if all else fails (.mobi). You've just stated the exact reason .mobi is needed without even knowing it

Good thing mobi is "stripped down" so that the consumer can get what they need quickly and efficiently. No need to spend half the day scrolling and zooming a .com to find what you need.

Some people miss the point of the mobile web. It's not to bring full blown pages with tons of info to the consumer. It's all about getting necessary info to the user in a timely manner!

What i got from Rubber Ducky's post was that it all depends on the type of phone you have. Personally i have a sidekick and it loads .coms in its full glory just fine and really fast. For most other smart phones, i.e. iphones, balckberrys, and many many more phones that are coming out everyday, support full browser capabilities. I see more smartphones on a daily basis than i do flip phones or other WAP browser phones.

I would also like to point out that most people that get flip phones or phones that do not have full browser capabilities DO NOT browse the internet. If they do its is seldomly done and only visit big sites for news, sports, and other information that is already supplied by major companies that use mobile optimization in their .com names.

To refer to the OP IMHO defensive regging is done to protect a brand or a website. For instance if i had Google.com i would reg pretty much every extension out there to protect the brand and maximize traffic to the website.

That is my opinion on defensive regging even though a lot of companies and businesses do not follow these guidelines.

 

[Rubber Duck]

Most of the phones out there now will be in the bin in the next two years.

More and more phones will be smart phones, indeed most phones will be smart phones, and the iPhone has no monopoly on being smart.

If the next three years is the niche that needs to be filled mTLD better get off their arses, because at the rate things are moving with dot Mobi they won't be ready in thirty years. We will all be running around with brain implants by then.

 

[hawkeye]

Anyway, what happen to the Dot Mobi button that was supposed to come as standard on evey handset?

Maybe you can tell, as no one ever said they were 'supposed to'! ...good grief.

 

[Ronald Regging]

I've likened .mobi in the past to ISDN. How many people have heard of ISDN? I mean when it first came out, it was a terrific concept. Many businesses employed it. However, within a year, it was obsolete. So I agree with Rubber Ducky with that aspect.

However, I do believe that a lot of companies registered .mobis as defensive regs, because the ramifications and possibilities for the extension made it worth having. A lot of them just got it to hold onto in case it ever took off. Because it did have the potential to take off, so they wanted to secure it to be able to reach mobile users if thats the way the tide went. However, this type of mentality and a reasonable unwillingness of companies to spend millions on advertising campaigns for an unproven extension has lead to stagnancy. The extension didn't take off, there is little development, even less advertising and technology will eclipse the need for .mobi altogether in a few years.

People need to remember that companies usually don't jump on technology trends... Most companies take forever to update their software, equipment, etc... I mean just think about how long it took some companies to even have an online presence, let alone shell out millions to promote a new, untested extension that wasn't even a default extension within mobile phones...

There is a huge difference between potential and success. That's why we're all in the game of speculation...