Discussion in 'gTLD Discussion' started by Premiums, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:38 PM.
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.
Separate names with a comma.