debate When are domainers/businesses going to recognise the value of these keyword perfect domains?

[interassets]

I'm still utterly amazed that over a year into the new gTLD's, domainers, investors and brands.. still don't see the value in them? Living in the past or what? Who's going to be the brave soul that launches a big marketing campaign with a gTLD, for them all to suddenly become widely recognised as domain names?

It's insane! One of my biggest regrets as a domainer is acquiring art.investments – a keyword perfect domain that absolutely does what it says on the tin... to list it on Flippa with $349 premium listing and for it to only sell for $550! I expected at least $x,xxx+ given the value of the art business (transactions upto $250million/painting.)

But I feel as domainers, we're limiting our own success in these new territories because we aren't willing to gamble in common sense. Staying with .com, .net etc. is playing it safe, but it's short sighted.

Art.investments or artinvestments.com .. which makes more logical sense? Which is easier to remember? Perhaps .com does just now, but the smart domainer predicts future trends.

I really believe in 5-10 years that the gTLD's will be the standard format. People will look at .com,.net etc. like dialing an international dial code every time you phone someone. Shouldn't we be encouraging the use of these domains by pushing them and ditching the fear of the unknown. Come on guys, see the future!

What's your thoughts?

(Disclaimer: Yes, I have crazy.discount for sale just now, and yes this post is out of rage at the $11 price it's sitting at. A beautiful, memorable and brandable domain for $11..! However, this a real post looking for real discussion on the subject. )

 

[biggie]

I'm still utterly amazed that over a year into the new gTLD's, domainers, investors and brands.. still don't see the value in them?

It's insane! One of my biggest regrets as a domainer is acquiring art.investments – a keyword perfect domain that absolutely does what it says on the tin... to list it on Flippa with $349 premium listing and for it to only sell for $550! I expected at least $x,xxx+ given the value of the art business (transactions upto $250million/painting.)

But I feel as domainers, we're limiting our own success in these new territories because we aren't willing to gamble in common sense. Staying with .com, .net etc. is playing it safe, but it's short sighted.

What's your thoughts?

Hi

your biggest regret s/b, paying premium price for art.whatever plus paying a $349 listing fee to auction on fllppya, without placing a reserve in expected roi.

tell us, what was your "net" return on that deal?

next mistake is auctioning your names "before" getting bids above, or at a price you would sell for.
this is fundamental to investing as flippya is liquidation market

other mistake is, you limited yourself and added extra expense by paying $349 fee to flippya.

before you gamble on common sense..... you gotta exercise it first.

imo....

 

[ealfert]

You just made an argument for .com. So much more saturated = confusion. You own nature.photo, maybe somebody else has nature.photos, nature.pics, nature.photography, big mess basically.

@JB Lions ... This post is not meant to attack you or single you out... I'm trying to better understand your point of view.

Doesn't .com have the same number of variants for "nature" and "photo"?

naturephoto.com
naturephotos.com
naturepics.com
naturepictures.com
naturephotography.com

Does that mean you would not buy any of the above because there are alternative that mean the same thing?

Aren't "regular" Internet also likely to have a hard time remembering if the website they visited previously was naturephoto.com or naturephotos.com or any of the other .com variants?

Would you pass up the opportunity to purchase naturephoto.com for a good price because there are other similar .com variants possible?

If the .com variants are not a problem, then why is it a problem with new gTLDs that use the same keywords and have the same number of alternatives?

I think any of the below are great domains to own if the price is right...

nature.photo
nature.photos
nature.pics
nature.pictures
nature.photography

 

[JB Lions]

@JB Lions ... This post is not meant to attack you or single you out... I'm trying to better understand your point of view.

Doesn't .com have the same number of variants for "nature" and "photo"?

naturephoto.com
naturephotos.com
naturepics.com
naturepictures.com
naturephotography.com

Does that mean you would not buy any of the above because there are alternative that mean the same thing?

Aren't "regular" Internet also likely to have a hard time remembering if the website they visited previously was naturephoto.com or naturephotos.com or any of the other .com variants?

Would you pass up the opportunity to purchase naturephoto.com for a good price because there are other similar .com variants possible?

If the .com variants are not a problem, then why is it a problem with new gTLDs that use the same keywords and have the same number of alternatives?

I think any of the below are great domains to own if the price is right...

nature.photo
nature.photos
nature.pics
nature.pictures
nature.photography

The world knows .com, part of the value. That's just one of the problems of the new gtlds, have to get people to remember something new and both sides of the dot vs. one side of the dot of something known worldwide. Also, this goes to investing in them as a domainer. End users who want to go the new gtlds route just have more options and it'll be cheaper.

 

[HeyNow]

Hi your biggest regret s/b, paying premium price for art.whatever plus paying a $349 listing fee to auction on fllppya

I like that, especially the "flippya" part. That's the best.

 

[S-B]

Here's my take...

Their is an inherent flaw with the majority of these extensions. We tend to forget that the .whatevers are businesses. Businesses need to have new and returning customers to survive. Right now, the only thing supporting them are domain investors. What happens when those renewals stack up and people start dropping them? What happens when the number of registrations dwindle and the business stops being profitable? They drop their dead weight or go out of business. So sure... some of these extensions may have value in 10 years but how many of them will still exist? I am not saying they are all doomed to fail but some will. On the other hand, you have the .com that has a ridiculous amount of registrations with domains trading in the 8-figure range. There is value now and there is money to be made now.

This brings me to my final point: There is a difference between speculators and investors. Which one do you want to be?

 

[equity78]

@ealfert does bring up a legitimate point, but I think JB was talking about from a domain investor standpoint, now everything gets diluted when you invest in those types of domains, the naturepics.com example is never going to have as much value as say a one word category defining domain or a unique brandable name. Once we get into using a keyword that has many similar competing terms, we have to know that lessens are bargaining position. If I have NaturePhotos.com and want $50,000 but the guy who owns NaturePics.com has a big bright buy it now on Sedo for $5,000 I have a dilemma. that buyer has choices and if they are just raw domains, no backlinks, no history, etc... I may have to lower my price on NaturePhotos.com.

Now I will say I do own one .Pics domain, I chose it because I liked Pics the best as its the shortest, the search numbers are good and I like who owns the .com version knowing he will ask for top dollar. The domain is puppy.pics, now I don't expect to sell it for a lot, I would sell it for a very reasonable price and I like knowing Frank Schilling owning PuppyPics.com will ask for a lot more, so I don't have to worry about the .com owner being a pricing pressure concern. But like JB pointed out, I do have to worry about Puppy.Photo/Photos/Pictures.

The upside is the name is a name I will hold because I can do something with as I love dogs and have pics, access to pics etc... I own one name, it doesn't matter. But I would never build a portfolio of .pics names because of all the alternatives.

To the point about speculation or investment - in anything new all investment starts out as speculation, Rick Schwartz was speculating 20 years ago on .com, the speculation paid off, just like speculation in a little company called Microsoft paid off.

Speculation on beta max vs vhs failed, speculation on Toys.com failed.

 

[carob]

We tend to forget that the .whatevers are businesses. Businesses need to have new and returning customers to survive. Right now, the only thing supporting them are domain investors. What happens when those renewals stack up and people start dropping them? What happens when the number of registrations dwindle and the business stops being profitable? They drop their dead weight or go out of business.

Precisely.

If you buy these extensions, even as an enduser, your are gambling that the extension as a whole will be financially viable. So you need to look into the company behind it.

 

[gpmgroup]

How much do .investments cost to renew each year?

 

[DryCreekDomains]

What a good discussion. Lots of opinions about the new gTLD.

My opinion is simple; it's all about awareness. The new gTLDs are just that, new. I have friends that work in the IT industry and are only slightly aware of the new gTLDs. My friends that aren't tech savvy give the 'deer in the headlights' look when I tell them I have invested in new gTLDs.

We are at the start of year 2. They major players are spending big bucks and finding creative ways to increase awareness. It won't happen overnight. But, eventually the intro of new gTLDs will become widely known and the secondary market will grow accordingly.

I look forward to the day somebody not in the industry suggests I search a particular TLD to find info...

 

[SirDrago]

The world knows .com, part of the value. That's just one of the problems of the new gtlds, have to get people to remember something new and both sides of the dot vs. one side of the dot of something known worldwide. Also, this goes to investing in them as a domainer. End users who want to go the new gtlds route just have more options and it'll be cheaper.

The world does know the Dot Com and up until 2 weeks ago it was king. Now here comes Google with a 1 BILLION dollar investment in SpaceX project. Now they purchase the Dot .App extension which only means a brand new internet followed by a new king of the hill.
The Pioneer of science Gene Roddenberry predicted the future years before must of us where born. The days of the Dot Com are surely coming to a end and you'll be able to buy them at your local .99 cent store next to Lp's, cassette tapes and cd's.
Dot App browser will be installed in every known to man by default and as they would say on Star Trek... Resistance is futile!
Every other extension will fall to the garbage can. IMO

 

[S-B]

The world does know the Dot Com and up until 2 weeks ago it was king. Now here comes Google with a 1 BILLION dollar investment in SpaceX project. Now they purchase the Dot .App extension which only means a brand new internet followed by a new king of the hill.
The Pioneer of science Gene Roddenberry predicted the future years before must of us where born. The days of the Dot Com are surely coming to a end and you'll be able to buy them at your local .99 cent store next to Lp's, cassette tapes and cd's.
Dot App browser will be installed in every known to man by default and as they would say on Star Trek... Resistance is futile!
Every other extension will fall to the garbage can. IMO

Fantasy land.

 

[SirDrago]

Fantasy land.

Easyy as 1, 2, 3...

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/21/technology/google-makes-1-billion-investment-in-spacex.html?_r=0

2. http://www.businessinsider.com/google-just-paid-25-million-to-buy-the-entire-app-web-domain-2015-2

3. http://www.wired.com/2015/03/googles-new-wireless-service-will-change-internet/

Continue to fool yourself that the Dot Com will be king forever.

 

[S-B]

Easyy as 1, 2, 3...

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/21/technology/google-makes-1-billion-investment-in-spacex.html?_r=0

2. http://www.businessinsider.com/google-just-paid-25-million-to-buy-the-entire-app-web-domain-2015-2

3. http://www.wired.com/2015/03/googles-new-wireless-service-will-change-internet/

Continue to fool yourself that the Dot Com will be king forever.

http://fox40.com/2015/02/06/photos-firefighters-rescue-cat-stuck-in-tree-yes-they-still-do-that/

http://www.meltontimes.co.uk/news/c...ue-cat-stuck-up-a-tree-in-old-dalby-1-6560426

I guess fighting fires is in the past and saving kittens is the obvious future.

#news

 

[SirDrago]

http://fox40.com/2015/02/06/photos-firefighters-rescue-cat-stuck-in-tree-yes-they-still-do-that/

http://www.meltontimes.co.uk/news/c...ue-cat-stuck-up-a-tree-in-old-dalby-1-6560426

I guess fighting fires is in the past and saving kittens is the obvious future.

#news

You can save whatever animal you like wearing platform shoes and listening to your walkman but the future will become what someone is willing to pay for it.

#CatchUp

 

[aditya agrawal]

1)I feel new GTLD's would require atleast 5 yrs before they are known to end users. You need to hold them till then.
2) Before buying $350 package on flippa, I'd suggest you put your domain list on namepros thread to ask them which one could fetch the best.

I'm still utterly amazed that over a year into the new gTLD's, domainers, investors and brands.. still don't see the value in them? Living in the past or what? Who's going to be the brave soul that launches a big marketing campaign with a gTLD, for them all to suddenly become widely recognised as domain names?

It's insane! One of my biggest regrets as a domainer is acquiring art.investments – a keyword perfect domain that absolutely does what it says on the tin... to list it on Flippa with $349 premium listing and for it to only sell for $550! I expected at least $x,xxx+ given the value of the art business (transactions upto $250million/painting.)

But I feel as domainers, we're limiting our own success in these new territories because we aren't willing to gamble in common sense. Staying with .com, .net etc. is playing it safe, but it's short sighted.

Art.investments or artinvestments.com .. which makes more logical sense? Which is easier to remember? Perhaps .com does just now, but the smart domainer predicts future trends.

I really believe in 5-10 years that the gTLD's will be the standard format. People will look at .com,.net etc. like dialing an international dial code every time you phone someone. Shouldn't we be encouraging the use of these domains by pushing them and ditching the fear of the unknown. Come on guys, see the future!

What's your thoughts?

(Disclaimer: Yes, I have crazy.discount for sale just now, and yes this post is out of rage at the $11 price it's sitting at. A beautiful, memorable and brandable domain for $11..! However, this a real post looking for real discussion on the subject. )

 

[Domainzy]

It is either black or white?..... Grey is not possible?!

As a popular sherpa once said: "It's all about traffic"

 

[DU]

@ interassets
I'm not aggressive or unfriendly, and I don't have a 'I hate people' attitude, but thank you for your condesending 'assessment'..

If I might be so condescending to suggest that your posts often have a voice that is very demeaning to your target, and yes, target is the right word. I'm not saying that you're wrong or right, not asking you to change, I'm just providing an additional unsolicited opinion for you to take on board or ignore.

Aren't "regular" Internet also likely to have a hard time remembering if the website they visited previously was naturephoto.com or naturephotos.com or any of the other .com variants?

This is an argument that is used but really has no merit or basis in anything real. The problem with the crowd of people that hold on to the .com is king mantra really don't have to provide any real argument because the fact that .com is King is obvious until such time that it's not true anymore. The caveat is that many of these people do ignore highly used and regarded ccTLDs (i.e. co.uk, .de, .nl, etc.).... but right now? .com is king.

So how do you defend the obvious? You make up stuff. The reality is that many successful businesses operate on .io, .ws, .biz, .us, .tv. You wouldn't know them because not every business is global, huge or warrants a one word keyword .com domain.

Most of the domain industry once you drop out of the top echelon is smoke and mirrors, imho. The *best* name is keyword.com. Period. Once you get into variants there are rules but it's more difficult to really know. Is a *topkeyword* .net better than a *threekeyword* .com?? Anyone who says you won't be taken seriously on a .net doesn't know what they are talking about. Some of the most successful people I've met operate with a business listing on Angie's List or a business card with a yahoo email address.

Some people are more comfortable operating where they know (.com) and thus fail to see opportunities anywhere else. That's fine...... but that doesn't change the fact that it's just as easy to lose $$$ on .com as it is any other TLD. The reality though is still that com is more liquid, easier to sell, easier to market, and has lower holding costs in its favor. Those are real differentiators and a key consideration. Also most people will compare to the .com today which is a disadvantage for newer gTLDs

I hear when will end users learn the value of domains... as much as I hear... when will domainers learn that it often doesn't matter and when will they stop sending me spam?

 

[biggie]

..yet you're upset because you put your domain up for sale now 'in the present' and it didn't sell for what you 'thought' it should sell for today. hmmm.......

If I might be so condescending to suggest that your posts often have a voice that is very demeaning to your target, and yes, target is the right word. I'm not saying that you're wrong or right, not asking you to change, I'm just providing an additional unsolicited opinion for you to take on board or ignore.

a "voice" is often heard, if and when, the reader gives it one.

to extract a tone, without extracting the message.... is a personal choice.

if one seeks the cold hard truths, from perspectives of the experienced, then they "must" open their minds just as they do while watching dn videos or reading blogs articles.

understand the words that pain your ego, instead of repeating those that entice "short-sighted" acquisitions.




imo....

 

[Dave]

In a weird kind of way, you need to stop looking at these as domains for a moment, but as keyword combinations, for a moment ignore the dot in between the keyword and the tld, it's the ones that have killer combinations that will be the big winners in years to come in my opinion. The likes of send.money, social.media, digital.media, web.host, cloud.host etc. This is because they all look great in terms of marketability, you can really picture domains like this being used on commercials, billboards and such.

 

[DomainGist]

I'm still utterly amazed that over a year into the new gTLD's, domainers, investors and brands.. still don't see the value in them

So, of these three parties:

1). Domainers
2). Investors
3). Brands

Which of those do you think are going to pay the best price for your domain? Only one of the three is an end-user.

When you listed your domain on Flippa you can realistically expect a fair number of eyes from number 1 and number 2 to find your listings.

But what steps did you take to put this domain before the eyes of number 3?

You sell a domain on flippa and you get a trade price. You sit on the domain for the long term and you achieve, one day, an end user price.

At $550 you got the trade price for the domain.

Did you, for example, even approach the owner of ArtInvestments.com who look to have owned that domain for 16 years and are currently building a shopify site on that domain?

That domain is currently being developed by Yang Gallery, who have galleries in Beijing and Singapore and sell "Chinese contemporary fine art".

I bet they have a fair bit of wonga too.

Did you do either of these things?

1). Offer them the domain?
2). Make them aware of the auction?

If the answer to those is no, then how could you possibly expect to find an end user with deep pockets?

 

[ealfert]

In a weird kind of way, you need to stop looking at these as domains for a moment, but as keyword combinations, for a moment ignore the dot in between the keyword and the tld, it's the ones that have killer combinations that will be the big winners in years to come in my opinion. The likes of send.money, social.media, digital.media, web.host, cloud.host etc. This is because they all look great in terms of marketability, you can really picture domains like this being used on commercials, billboards and such.

You phrased that exactly the way I feel, but hadn't verbalized before. Those are exactly the types of domains that have value.

Unfortunately, the majority of those are reserved by the registry or have extremely high annual renewals. But registries miss many and those are the ones I try to acquire. Even if you only acquire 1 or 2 in each new gTLD released, you will have an amazing portfolio of very valuable gTLD domains.

Early last year, I made some mistakes and bought lesser quality domains in some new gTLDs that were relased, but I am being much more selective now and that is what I believe is the correct strategy regarding new gTLDs.

I don't care which gTLD I buy as long as the word to the left of the dot goes very well with the word to the right of the dot. Each gTLD have a very limited number of these "big winners". If you don't get any of them in a particular gTLD, just skip that gTLD launch and wait for the next one.

 

[DU]

a "voice" is often heard, if and when, the reader gives it one.
to extract a tone, without extracting the message.... is a personal choice.
if one seeks the cold hard truths, from perspectives of the experienced, then they "must" open their minds just as they do while watching dn videos or reading blogs articles.

This is Off Topic.

To suggest that in writing the voice is extracted by the reader and that means the message is missed? You expect the whole to know what you say is just honesty? That we should be eager for your expertise and cow-tow to your experience. Just WOW! The amazing thing really is that you think how your communicate that experience is not condescending - you expect 95% of the world that doesn't even know you to understand that your "voice" is not projected but interpreted badly by the reader because we don't understand hard truths and have delusional thinking. You expect us based on a few month on the forum to open our mind to your genius and knowledge and accept that your negative words are just plain and simple harmless truths. Self-evident truths, at that. God you must hate us idiots who want respect here on a forum where people try to be self-aggrandizing and attempt feel superior by lauding their experience and dot.com brilliance over us? Because you know, the truth always hurts, get over it and be grateful you're getting our experience for free. We're helping you idiots for nothing, really.

So yeah. It's all in the reader's interpretation, right?

I could have just said that if tone was all subjectively interpreted we would have far less poetry and fewer books to enjoy. Sarcasm is a useful tool to prove points but its overuse can be demeaning. Certain words immediately connote negativity, and some are even vitriolic and personal. There is almost always a better and friendlier way to convey the truth. It works, more often than not, better. People respond to constructive criticism.

There are ways to point out why the OP misjudged or misunderstood the market without implying he's delusional. Yes IMPLYING and not the reader INFERRING. But that's just an opinion.

Hawkeye can continue to post how he wants but his free experience becomes less and less valuable the harder he tries to be well.. whatever.

 

[hawkeye]

If I might be so condescending to suggest that your posts often have a voice that is very demeaning to your target, and yes, target is the right word. I'm not saying that you're wrong or right, not asking you to change, I'm just providing an additional unsolicited opinion for you to take on board or ignore.

Well defaultuser, or whatever your moniker is this month, thanks, but your 'unsolicited condescending opinion' (coming from the resident non-domainer postaholic here at NP), is one I'll go with the choice of to ignore, as I do with all of your ramblings here.

 

[DU]

Well defaultuser, or whatever your moniker is this month, thanks, but your 'unsolicited condescending opinion' (from the resident non-domainer postaholic here at NP), is one I'll go with the choice of to ignore, as I do with all of your ramblings here.

So am I reading this right: this is just honesty? Am I incorrectly interpreting condescension here?

Oh wait, you just wanted to prove a point. Much appreciated.

 

[hawkeye]

Much appreciated.

You're welcome.