Labeled as discuss in gTLD Discussion started by Premiums, Jan 12, 2018.
Just wanna know why, domainers don't like new gTLDs?
Because end users don't like them ?
But in fact, many domainers have bought new gTLDs, even skeptics are taking a chance. So I would say not all domainers are downright hostile. Without domainers and speculation registries would fare even worse.
I like them and bought my latest one a moment ago...
I think another reason is that many domainers don't have any good ones (if any ).
Because of unregulated pricing, registry domain theft, exorbitant renewals, and a slow adoption rate. They also rarely hug you back, no matter how much love you show them.
Yep. The better question is why don't new gTLD like domainers.
hook, line, and sinker
There have been some decent sales, but those names were perfect fits. powerful keyword dot powerful keyword emd's
Then there are the rest of them.
An end user with a start up that cant afford the com can get the keywords they like, but as soon as they make any money they look for the com.
D2D sales don't count.
Maybe another reason is that the registries hoarded most of the names that could be viable or at least make sense, leaving the crumbs to domainers. The poor taste of domainers and lack of discernment doesn't help of course but still.
Most nTLDs are niche and the pool of meaningful keywords is limited. Opportunities are already scarce without registries holding out coveted names. So I can understand the lack of enthusiasm over higher-priced extensions with limited opportunities and sluggish end user demand.
Somebody should have taught them you don't bite the hand that feed you
In preventing squatting, registries have become the squat kings. But now they won't get squat for that which they squat on.
A lot of the big players in the domain industry are threatened by the new gTLD's and are pooo pooing them big time. There is no doubt that they are at least affecting the value of some .com's but as stated the consumer adoption is limited.
I think the vast majority of them so far have been acquired for vanity plate reasons and I personally would pay a fair bit for vanity plates. However outside of the PERFECT KEYWORD category the domains are virtually worthless and one would be wise to avoid them.
That said.... the ones that fall into that PERFECT KEYWORD category can have some phenomenal sales attached to them and a number of "on the ball" domainers have made some really strong sales with them.
So my official response to the main question is that we definitely do feel threatened by them but some domainers have chosen to embrace them and the ones really good at their craft have made some good money on them.
Like it or not, they are here to stay, some will come and some will go but in the end a number of them are here to stay. As domainers we can embrace the right ones and make money or we can bitch about them and watch the more progressive domainers take home the paychecks.
Personally, I (also) think that the number of extensions are ridiculously high and I don’t like the premium pricing policy either. Still you might catch some perfect keyword combos, without having deep pockets.
I would not say that they don't "like" them. Most buy them but they just don't say it
While I agree with the posts before, I want to add a few thoughts.
Since search engines become smarter, because now they read your website content and can discern what is your website niche, the demand for keyword domain names has diminished. So now that the non-keyword domains are the somewhat viable option, again, .com has been "the most wanted" domain.
Another issue that has plagued ngTLD is that some have earner notorious reputation because on launch they had very low registration price and were used extensively by short-term scammer websites.
Though my personal opinion is that ngTLDs are fine for websites, as long as the owner invests enough time and effort into building quality content as that is the key for good SEO, again, because search engines are "reading" that content.
However, end-users must be persuaded that ngTLD are just as good as .com from SEO perspective.
Bulloney loves them...why? Because Bulloney knows how to promote them, and sell them to end users
Just glad I'm NOT a domainer
Bulloney, denial is the first phase. It's ok, we are all here for you, when you are ready. Come. Enter the asylum. Embrace the vortex.
bulloney.today why this name is available for reg ?
I think that the registries could do a huge amount to make the new gTLD situation better by doing three things:
(a) Commit to a reasonable renewal rate for some significant period (i.e. for the next 5 years the renew price will not be more than $9 per year, or something like that). This would put them on a similar footing to the controls on .com increases (actually better if it was for more than a couple of years). And associated with that, there is one renewal rate for the TLD, no premium at high renewal.
(b) Promote to the general public that new gTLDs are every bit as valid to host a website. The information is slowly taking hold, but very slowly.
(c) Get some big name players to sign on to establish credibility. The people in charge of .design seem to have done this well with Kohler, Facebook, NPR, etc. on board. Others extensions need to do similarly.
There is no doubt that some of the anti-new gTLD sentiment is from .com domain holders who view that their portfolio would be worth far less if new gTLDs took off (of course those invested in new gTLDs are also biased, since the worth of their portfolios depend on success of the new extensions). For example, would CryptoWorld.com really be worth $195,000 if there was genuine acceptance of new gTLDs since Crypto.world is for sale now? The new version is more aesthetically pleasing, but I bet will go for far less!
There is money to be made in both legacy and new gTLDs, but for most of us it will be challenging in either. I I like the new gTLDs, but plan to continue to have a portfolio with country code and .com as well as a majority in the new gTLDs.
Bob...like you, I have a pretty diversified portfolio of domains. However, the new gTLD's have more potential than the majority of my .com's. Out of approximately 750 domains, 450 are .coms and 300 are gTLD's. While that's a 60/40 split, the investment $$$ is more like 75/25. This is because the average cost for my .com's is around 8.50 per, while the average cost for the gTLD is just 3.50 per domain, or less than 50%. Total cost for my 300 gTLD's is $1,050.
I do understand your argument about the typical domainers sentiment about gTLD's. I want all segments of my portfolio to succeed, but it doesn't take much for my gTLD's to succeed when I just paid $1,050 for all 300 of my domains. When you own domains like FreePizza.today, custody.today, weigh.today, merger.today, cooljazz.live, jazzfusion.live and domainrevolution.live you really have something to sell
My gTLD's represent industries with over 10 Trillion in GDP. I also own PassionSells.com, and for what it's worth, Bulloney is probably one of the most passionate guys you'll ever meet. I'll leave you with this from coach K at Duke....NextPlay.today......and please don't ask a stupid question like, did you know that .today is only good for just today Trust me...one of you domainers really asked that question, and if you're thinking the same thing, you really need to look for another line of work
I would like them if they were good investments, but they almost always aren’t. Domainers like @kerala and @Fancy.domains have mastered the ntld market, but there are plenty more people (who have already commented and liked posts on this thread) who see Homes.ForSale sell for $75k and think that buying LuxuryHomesFor.Sale and “expecting educated and reasonable offers in the $xx,xxx range only” is an effective business model
So have your ever "personally" tried to sell any industry specific gTLD's? Unless you have, you really don't know whether or not they're a good investment. And even if you tried and failed, it still doesn't mean they're not a good investment. As far as I can tell, few domainers have the passion or the sales and marketing experience needed to sell "any" gTLD's. Anyone else creative or curious enough to present your "bait" to end users different than the rest of the crowd? Or do you all do it the same way? Regardless of all the negatives, some real and some perceived, my gTLD's will be a good investment
I personally believe your thread is happening to miss one of the biggest pictures in this industry ...
If you're in this industry you're either trying to make money or you do make money and if you like money (who doesn't here) then most likely you're not going to like it when something new (GTLDs) is challenging the known investments of your common consumers' side (TLDs) ...
TLD extensions V. GTLD extensions
I however do believe the market speaks for itself, some people are wise and some people will invest, neither one of the two individuals controls the future of this industry though ... That is an honor bestowed to the beholder, and some individuals can carry that responsibility and maintain control of their own greed in this industry (not mentioning names) and some people cannot do the above ...
It is a shame indeed; but these historical recollections will develop a greater future of Internet real estate and in that we will find honest hardworking (GTLD) owners and (TLD) owners ... Business and personal usage can be accounted and some already know this ... There will be some to dislike what I say in dismay these events never occur, because if they did, then they are under the impression their investment(s) would be failing or is/are failing ... This is preposterous !
Old Domainer only believe in (Stick with .com) that's why they don't like new Gtld or other extention then .com
I like every extention which make sense (I don't believe in stick with .com as sometimes after having that .com for many years, some Domainer take that stick in there _ _ _ )
PS:- I am not expert in this field in any means, it's only my two cents
all the good ones are reserved and high priced. too high risk few of them sell for profit. seeing 'fire.glass' sell for 5k was really random. i have only seen a few folks sell these. maybe they will blossom alongside the aging .coms and become more profitable eventually, maybe not. I will consider them in my investment flipping efforts carefully.
icetek...you said about gTLD's "all the good ones are reserved and high priced" I'm not sure where you've been looking, but I've reg'd from 400-500 gTLD names, most of which, if you were to reg the exact .com appraise for well over $10,000 each at GD. Granted, we all know the appraisal piece to this industry is a BIG JOKE, but I intend to use the big joke factor to help me sell my gTLD names. Because I shop around, the "average" cost of my gTLD's are a little under $5.
Good Luck to you icetek!
the best way to sum up why gTLDs suck is this:
I used to use stocks.exchange for crypto.
and even though I'm obv into domains and own gTLDs, and even though i'm fully aware of the website. And even though I'm actively trying to go against the stereotype that people aren't aware of gTLDs, so they don't understand they're an address....
...despite all that, I found myself typing in stocks.exchange.com on autopilot when I wanted to visit the exchange. It happened enough times that I honestly realized that gTLDs would never really make it.
it's not that people aren't aware of gTLDs, it's just that the .com brainwashing won't really end. As long as .com is prevalent, people will be conditioned into thinking websites end in .com.
I'm sure lots of people will argue with me. but it's from my own personal experience. the fact that most of the sites I visit everyday have me typing in xfiojasofjsafj.com, over and over... it takes an actual flip of a switch effort to NOT type .com at the end of an internet address in the address bar.
companies would find this undesirable tbh. when your customer has to make an extra mental effort just to type your domain into the search bar (that's like step 0 of whatever "consumer journey to conversion."), well anyway it's just not good.
imho the only way people will be used to gTLDs is if there's some kind of radical shift away from .com websites. The two can't really coexist happily.
Separate names with a comma.