.co/.me/.tv/.info's - Good article

[addz123]

Really enjoyed reading this article;

http://morganlinton.com/why-i-think-some-of-the-hottest-new-gtlds-arent-new-to-us/

I've said it before, last year .co was by far the most ridiculously undervalued domain. I pretty much see it on par with .net/org from a development perspective, if not better, yet I still see people treating it at 10% the price of .net/org.

Also seem to see new businesses and brands using .co hitting the news every week. e.g. Twitters new video site on Vine.co.

 

[Bailey]

I think anybody that has worked in the Gtld market for any length of time has an awareness of the significance of just about every popular extension (including .CO)

However, It really is a 'Horses-for-courses' market. Anybody just picking good com sales to identify strong .CO's etc is not thinking right.

The short piece that you've referenced above seems to take the 'meet.me' sale as general reference to mean 'dot .me' is a significant player - but, fails to mention what a good pairing the term and extension are in that instance.

I've always said if you can find a nice 'word/extension match' (whatever the extension) register-it But, the two parts do need to 'play together'

 

[julian]

Yes I agree to some extent with this article - even .biz have some prospects used in the right way

I always thought that .info should be better than it is - seems it got off to a bad start with spammy usage.

Really enjoyed reading this article;

http://morganlinton.com/why-i-think-some-of-the-hottest-new-gtlds-arent-new-to-us/

I've said it before, last year .co was by far the most ridiculously undervalued domain. I pretty much see it on par with .net/org from a development perspective, if not better, yet I still see people treating it at 10% the price of .net/org.

Also seem to see new businesses and brands using .co hitting the news every week. e.g. Twitters new video site on Vine.co.

 

[Bailey]

Virtually all the "acceptable" extensions make good sales from time to time, as reported in Dnjournal every week.

What you will notice is that most of the sales are direct to the 'end-user'. There isn't such a strong 'domainer to domainer' market, This is due to a number of reasons, But mainly due to the unpredictability of selling (there are exceptions of course, for the strongest of terms and pairings)

So what you have, is those holding portfolios of .info, .co, .biz .me - etc being aware that any contact made is likely to be somebody who has identified the particular domain as something they have a particular use for. It therefore can lead to the holder, being assured of a reasonable sale price (within reason) This unfortunately leads to a disproportionate "perception" of the number of sales that reach the sales-charts as being a reflective of the volume of sales - This is in comparison to the popular and longer established extensions ie, .com ,net .org and Country Codes.

Again I will reiterate, if you can get yourself into the mindset of that end-user you have a good chance, of getting that sale. I do think you need to get them listed on as many sales platforms as possible, and don't expect buyers to turn-up on the off- chance you may be willing to sell.

Try to avoid the common trap of working on the percentages of value of the .com etc for all and sundry domains. Because it doesn't work.

Your (in the main) looking for a 'cognitive' match with the term - not just seeing it as a percentage.

 

[Bailey]

Ps. I don't want to be over critical. but, that piece of referenced above written by Morgan Linton has been doing the rounds for years. Sure it delivers some 'feel-good' factor for domainers*. Won't make a blind bit of difference to the market though

*And yep I've got about 30 or so domains in those referenced in the piece

 

[sdsinc]

I would take that article with a pinch of salt.
It's already hard enough to sell good .com and the market is fundamentally illiquid.

The odds of selling of .me or .co are even lower, unless you own premium keywords (that usually weren't available for regfee on day one).

I don't think .co is undervalued, it's in fact been overrated but domainers are coming back to their senses - the hype doesn't last forever.
The only successful .co domainer I know is Mike Mann, the other winner is the registry (as always).

In .me there has been one sale of 450K but it isn't the norm. It's a niche TLD where few keywords will really fit so the opportunities are limited.
.info ? Sorry but it's still not a very prominent TLD, after over a decade.

If you want to know which extensions do sell, read Dnjournal. Then you'll see .co or .me or .whatever don't take a lot of spots every week.

 

[namealot]

Its not the tld cctld etc it’s the fact there is no business sense or a deluded one behind the reg in the first place, Little or lousy research if there is any ? Has there ever been a Tld’s cctlds etc launch that someone hasn’t made a profit selling a name on?

You can guarantee as much as any domain to make a sale but what the profit is and how long it might be is a different matter. Often names regged have no market, product, service demand, etc most weselltheabsolutlybest.bs Its not just a case of build they will come or it will make a profit if it list at the top or the search results that seams to elude a lot of domainers kings new clothes not real viable business but that not exclusive to new Tld’s cctlds etc

 

[noonoo1]

I've done ok from .co
Best was $5,500

My last was 2 weeks ago, just over $1,300

Good keywords

 

[julian]

lets face it the last thing large .com portfolio holders want is for people to think - 'hey do I really need to pay this outrageous sum for a .com domain when I can do a job on a .me or a .info etc and get global reach".

The thing is i'm a believer in brands, people will use it and come back if its good and if you want to join.me in this belief then feel free..

p.s I think .net is dying - its solid extension but old hat - web 3.0 will be about the love.me's and watch.tv

 

[websaway]

The stronger the brand of the extension, the more names within that extension are valuable.

The weaker the brand of the extension the less names within that extension are valuable.

So if the extension as a brand becomes stronger names will become more saleable and if the brand becomes weaker names will become less saleable.

When a few names within an extension sell for high amounts before the extension as a brand has become strong then the authenticity of those sales for me are questionable.

 

[julian]

yes, I suppose we're seeing now not only the brand of the domain but the brand involvement in the extension too (maybe even the return of the domain hack to some extent )

its very important to stand out in web now - join.com vs join.me - talk of traffic loss etc either way.. not so sure it washes - .com is king for many things but perhaps the worm is turning now..

The stronger the brand of the extension, the more names within that extension are valuable.

The weaker the brand of the extension the less names within that extension are valuable.

So if the extension as a brand becomes stronger names will become more saleable and if the brand becomes weaker names will become less saleable.

When a few names within an extension sell for high amounts before the extension as a brand has become strong then the authenticity of those sales for me are questionable.

 

[websaway]

yes, I suppose we're seeing now not only the brand of the domain but the brand involvement in the extension too (maybe even the return of the domain hack to some extent )

its very important to stand out in web now - join.com vs join.me - talk of traffic loss etc either way.. not so sure it washes - .com is king for many things but perhaps the worm is turning now..

Brandwise .Me v. com ?

I don't think it could happen, it's like a new fizzy drink trying to rival c*ca c*la .

Too much history too much traction.

 

[julian]

I think your missing the point - i'd take join.me over join.com all day long for that project - in these domain hack brand instances it not make sense.

Brandwise .Me v. com ?

I don't think it could happen, it's like a new fizzy drink trying to rival c*ca c*la .

Too much history too much traction.

 

[Bailey]

I think your missing the point - i'd take join.me over join.com all day long for that project - in these domain hack brand instances it not make sense.

I agree with you Julian. It's no different from any sort of play in advertising - sure a domainer is going to want the .com all-day-long. purely for it's inherent value but, if you willing to put money behind getting you name memorable (against an also ran) then Join.me is a much better stall to be pitching on.

Things could turn full-circle again in a couple of years - If the use of hacks gets so overplayed, that they no longer catch the publics imagination

 

[Blossom]

I don't think it could happen, it's like a new fizzy drink trying to rival c*ca c*la .

Too much history too much traction.

The world would be a very different place if Mark Zuckerberg had shared your view with MySpace.

 

[addz123]

I think your missing the point - i'd take join.me over join.com all day long for that project - in these domain hack brand instances it not make sense.

Exactly.

This is why I think many of the new gTLDs will be successful and encroach on the .com/co.uk market.

Of course a single .whatever isn't going to rival .com, but collectively people will start getting used to seeing them. The insane amount of opportunities that will be available for new brands and businesses when these new gTLDs are released could make .com redundant.

Why pay $2000 for yourbrand.com when you could get your.brand for $50?

e.g. Fox.sports, BBC.news, love.money, Nandos.food, ManUtd.tickets, London.deals, Cheap.deals.

Once people get used to moving the "." into the brand then it will make .com/co.uk redundant. It makes no difference whether the extension takes off, because all you're doing is remembering the brand with the decimal point.

Even something like Green.law, Green.accountant, Sheffield.construction

They'll be a tipping point where the extension you're using doesn't even matter, it's all about having a short, intuitive URL.

 

[Bailey]

I think your taking it a little (read Big) to far there addz123. Having spent many years in marketing, - (and i'm not reluctant to learn new tricks) I think you'll find a .brand or whatever extension doesn't and won't quite match the advertisers dream. They like to be 'Creative', You just have to be on that wavelength .

Sorry mate but." .com redundant" - Not until they reinvent the internet in it's entirety.

However, There is a middle ground to be had, As a domainer you just have to be comfortable buying into it

 

[snooze]

I think the new extensions will take a while before they become mainstream, because the generation that see as king .com is the one with the money. I have noticed many companies started with new extension (i.e bit.ly) as soon as the venture money start rolling in they buy the .com.

I also think it depends on how comfortable they are with the extension and at the moment there is huge possibility that you can leak traffic without the big extension.

 

[Bailey]

Indeed snooze, there is so many avenues and probabilities, Nobody in their right mind nails all their colours to a single mast, let alone their own 'speculative' money.

But, we have been in this same ground for a long-time, with .me .tv .pro and all the rest and it is difficult to see why some don't learn the lessons of the past. Some of the rhetoric needs curtailing (Hopefully without causing offense)

And that's a nice example you gave Seeing I recently sold the .com to a Company that had been using quite successfully the .in extension in a word-play (time to get bigger they thought - and why not)

 

[addz123]

Sorry mate but." .com redundant" - Not until they reinvent the internet in it's entirety.

2,000 new gTLDs. Isn't this what's happening?

But, we have been in this same ground for a long-time, with .me .tv .pro and all the rest and it is difficult to see why some don't learn the lessons of the past.

This is apples and oranges. First of all, .tv/.me weren't even gTLDs when they launched. It's only until very recently they have been treated that way.

Secondly, how can you compare half a dozen new gTLDs to a climate with 2,000 new gTLDs being released within the next year?

Lastly, these new gTLDs are different. They cover the most popular markets and create more opportunities for brands to be creative with more unique vanity and shorter URLs then ever before. No one was ever going to move their .com to a .me or .co, there was no incentive on the table for ever doing so. However, there is a huge incentive for brands to use these new gTLDs to shorten their URL and create more marketing opportunities.

I've written about this before, do you think Mcdonalds would prefer their current Mcdonaldsmenu.info domain to Mcdonalds.menu? Or Nandos.co.uk/menu to Nandos.menu.

.Video is another good candidate for the new video/streaming sites for the 21st century.

I just don't think you realise the supply/demand nature of the internet. The reason you make money as a domainer is because you currently operate in a limited supply market of good domains. If you own the domain Green.co.uk, you can auction it between various companies in different industries called Green (e.g. Green activists group, Green farming, Green hardware shop etc etc).

These new gTLDs create a whole new marketplace for mom and dad businesses who won't be forced to using the secondary domain marketplace.

Maybe .com won't become redundant, but from the moment the new gTLDs are released the market is only going to go one way. More and more brands will build themselves up using gTLDs, many will switch from .com to the shorter URLs, you'll see tons of vanity gTLDs used in marketing, and brands using their own gTLDs will change the dynamics greatly. Football.Nike, Mercurial.Nike, F50.nike, A4.Audi etc.