question Why .onl not popular

[Dr. Aftab]

Why .onl not as popular as other new gTLDs like .xyz ? Although it's short and catchy

 

[HotKey]

Beats me. It should be toppling the charts. Oh well. Theres always .gdn, not only is it as short and catchy as .onl, it has the added bonus of being as useless as blowing smoke up someone's arse to cure flatulance.

 

[disaac81]

.onl looks terrible and sounds not much better... why on worth would anyone choose to brand on it.

 

[DrJacoby]

Why .onl not as popular as other new gTLDs like .xyz ? Although it's short and catchy

Short [X]
Catchy [ ]
Pronounceable [ ]

 

[Fancy.domains]

The crazy number of extension has caused domain inflation.

 

[Dr. Aftab]

.xyz looks even worse but still got millions of registrations.

 

[urlurl]

Why .onl not as popular as other new gTLDs like .xyz ? Although it's short and catchy

Never heard of personally, so i guess that answers your question

and to me, it has nothing going for it

 

[urljunky]

There is a .onl extension?

 

[urlurl]

yup, stands for Orange 'and' Lemons

 

[namerav]

Short form of online

 

[ecalc]

The 20:1 initial price disadvantage can't be helping ...

 

[TestCase]

Huh!?!?!

Until this thread I had no idea this extension existed. Once aware of it, I couldn't figure out what it might stand for or suggest. (Thanks urlurl & namerav for some suggested meanings. )

Yes it's short, but there are plenty of other short ones as well and I see nothing "catchy" about it. Also, in my eyes, it is "visually unappealing" as part of a domain name. Add to all this that it's pretty pricey extension and I really see no use or need for it.

Buuuuuut.... Beauty is in the eye of the holder! If it floats your boat and you like it, then I wish you the best of luck with this extension!

 

[nomen]

Not that great extension. Reminds me of .ARCHI which is probably the worst TLD in excistence.

 

[DomainRecap]

.xyz looks even worse but still got millions of registrations.

Sure, at 99-cents (or as low as a penny) a pop.

 

[DomainRecap]

Not that great extension. Reminds me of .ARCHI which is probably the worst TLD in excistence.

Yeah, all we need now is .VERONICA. .BETTY and .JUGHEAD.

 

[tupungato]

Not catchy, not pronounceable, especially in English. I invest in some nGTLDs, I even have some .online names, but I won't buy any .onl.

 

[Dr. Aftab]

I was just comparing it with .xyz. I don't think .xyz deserves that millions of registrations.
If .onl is terrible, .xyz is that too

 

[HotKey]

^ Anything that's cheap will cloud peoples judgement, no matter how terrible. Not sure what .onl's game plan is though, since the release in 2014 or 15 they have moved a ton of names to registry-reserved.

Moot point anyways, I don't see this extension gaining traction- unless they hire the same marketing gurus as .xyz and offer the same promos etc..but it won't ever be taken seriously.

 

[Fancy.domains]

.xyz looks even worse but still got millions of registrations.

Much, much better, intense and wider marketing!

 

[Kate]

I was just comparing it with .xyz. I don't think .xyz deserves that millions of registrations.
If .onl is terrible, .xyz is that too

Both are horrible, we agree. But most nTLDs are horrible too. Even the best performing (whatever that means) are not very desirable.