Why I love end-users bringing up GTLD alternatives...

tomcarl · Aug 23, 2016

In the last couple of months, I've had a couple of people try to bring up other TLDs during negotiations. One was for .blog another was .io

I find these so easy to rebuttal that I now almost welcome these "gTLD" objections. It opens a door for me to better elaborate on the value of my domain.

For the .io guy, who told me he can get the same name on .io for $30, I sent him a link to the sale of Agario.com, a domain that once had next to no liquid value or type-ins, now gets a ton of free traffic, and sold for $10K in an auction simply because of the popularity of Agar.io. I sincerely wished him the best of luck with the popularity of new project using .io. In response he increased his offer substantially than his initial lowball (which was still less than what I would consider, he was a small-time app developer and just didn't have the budget). Till this day, the .io version of my domain remains unregistered. He probably opted for another .com within his budget.

For the .blog guy, I replied the same, but this time also referred him to Twitch.com which was acquired by Amazon after acquiring Twitch.tv, and also educated him on the fact that there was no way that the keyword.blog equivalent of my domain was going to be available for a standard regfee (it's a 3-letter 1-word), it'll be either taken by another investor or have a premium renewal, not to mention increase the value of my domain should his blog become a success. They emailed me a week later with a higher offer, again one I don't care to accept.

So just a word of advice when negotiating, gTLDs make your domains more valuable folks, not less. People just have budgets to work with and have new options to settle for, and for those who settle and find a gtld will help them be looked at as "innovators" and will "stand out" - Go right ahead, you're driving up traffic and demand for a keyword or phrase available on thousands of other extensions, including the .com that is sitting there getting more traffic than it originally did, waiting to be purchased, likely by another innovator with a bigger budget.

comati · Aug 23, 2016

the new gTLD are eroding the value of old gTLd (except .com) and repurposed ccTLD
nobody in the right mind will compare new gTLDs with .coms

GoKaizen · Aug 24, 2016

Com, org, cctlds are what people use.

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

Why I love end-users bringing up GTLD alternatives...

Wow, I thought end users hadn't heard of new gTLDs and that's why they are all gonna fail! LOL

Jurgen Wolf · Aug 24, 2016

Adam27 said:
Com, org, cctlds are what people use.

But .io/.tv/any .LL are ccTLDs.

And yes, you may receive a tons of type-in to .COMs if such websites are very popular, usually within Alexa 100K...
A few samples are not a general rule, just a certain cases when the required conditions are met.

E-Promote · Aug 24, 2016

If they really wanted a new gTLD of your name then they would buy it. They usually just bring it up in an effort to force your price lower. They are talking to you because they want your name, you are still in the sellers seat, just where you want to be and they have shown some cards while thinking they are being clever.

ZapNano · Aug 24, 2016

mad409 said:
Why I love end-users bringing up GTLD alternatives...

Wow, I thought end users hadn't heard of new gTLDs and that's why they are all gonna fail! LOL

Kate · Aug 24, 2016

mad409 said:
Wow, I thought end users hadn't heard of new gTLDs and that's why they are all gonna fail! LOL

Then they should go ahead, buy them and use them, not just use them as bargaining chips LOL.

In fact it's not like they have so much more choice. Right now we have hundreds of new strings, but only a few are actually relevant depending on your intended purpose. It's not like you have hundreds of alternatives to choose from. For example if you are in the tech field, you could possibly use .tech or .technology, .computers or something like that. You are not going to buy a .hiv or .horse.
When you have identified a suitable extension, if you want a nice keyword, it's very likely that it will either be taken already, or reserved by the registry. It may be available but at a hefty price. The end user is then back to square one.

The whole game was designed so that icann and friends would make more money, bringing more available keywords to the masses was an afterthought.

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

Kate said:
The whole game was designed so that icann and friends would make more money, bringing more available keywords to the masses was an afterthought.

And could you please explain the difference when icann started allowing cctlds vs new gtlds? You're heavily invested in cctlds, was that not a money grab in your eyes too per your thinking?

garptrader · Aug 24, 2016

Years ago I used to register the .Net of any .COM acquisition as a protective registration so that if I were approached by an end user, they could not just acquire the .Net for reg fee. However, over time I found that noone wanted the .Net. I can only recall one case where someone bought both the .COM and the .Net and even then they did not pay that much for the .Net. So I was spending a lot of money on protective renewals and decided to drop most of those defensive registrations. I did find in some cases development occurring on the .Net or domain investors picking up the .Net. Of course now there are so many alternatives, a potential buyer that does not want to pay up for the .COM has a myriad of reg fee alternatives. That makes investing in non-.COM domains even riskier because how much leverage do you have with a .Info domain now?

168 · Aug 24, 2016

Source w3techs.com

Historical trends in the usage of top level domains for websites

This report shows the historical trends in the usage of top level domains since August 2015.

1 Aug 2015 1 Aug 2016
.com 50.8% 50.6% 50.5% 50.3% 50.1% 49.8% 49.7% 49.6% 49.5% 49.4% 49.3% 49.1% 49.0% 48.9%

Kate · Aug 24, 2016

mad409 said:
And could you please explain the difference when icann started allowing cctlds vs new gtlds? You're heavily invested in cctlds, was that not a money grab in your eyes too per your thinking?

Of course not, ccTLDs were added to the root between 1985 and the early 1990s. Some like .us .uk are as old as .com. There was no domain market then.

The strings that are created today are purely artificial and not even backed up by meaningful demand.

PS:

In one particularly amusing anecdote, Dr. Mockapetris recalled that the original idea was to use ccTLDS only. When some members of the small group charged with setting up the system kept pressing for gTLDs as well, those who had opposed it finally relented, saying ".com will never amount to anything anyhow." I'll have more on Dr. Mockapetris's talk in our comprehensive show review article that will be published late next week.

Source: http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2009/dailyposts/04-30-09.htm

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

Kate said:
Of course not, ccTLDs were added to the root between 1985 and the early 1990s. Some like .us .uk are as old as .com. There was no domain market then.

The strings that are created today are purely artificial and not even backed up by meaningful demand.

PS:

Source: http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2009/dailyposts/04-30-09.htm

Doesn't matter when cctlds were added, it's still a keyword money grab per your opinion and nothing different than new gTLDs.

Your position is clear, anything is a keyword ICANN money grab as you stated other than what .com?

You're really going back into the time machine now, if I'm correct I'm thinking .us had restrictions back then.

Kate · Aug 24, 2016

ccTLDs were never designed as a money grab when they were created. Although a few like .tv .co .me were repurposed.
I don't have a problem with the old strings. I think it's the new strings that are useless and even harmful. Think of the stuff like .mobi .tel, they are now zombie TLDs and the root zone is littered with garbage.

PS .us was opened to the public in 2002 but still has restrictions.

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

Kate said:
ccTLDs were never designed as a money grab when they were created. Although a few like .tv .co .me were repurposed.
I don't have a problem with the old strings. I think it's the new strings that are useless and even harmful. Think of the stuff like .mobi .tel, they are now zombie TLDs and the root zone is littered with garbage.

PS .us was opened to the public in 2002 but still has restrictions.

You confirmed my point, .us can't be used in your first example therefore less merit can be taken from the the rest.

Let's see how it all pans out Kate, me nor you have a clue, do we?

Therefore we agree to disagree...

equity78 · Aug 24, 2016

ICANN did not create country codes as a money grab, ICANN was not even created when they were delegated. IANA oversaw their rollout, every country in the world wanted their piece of the web.

IANA is responsible for determining an appropriate trustee for each ccTLD. Administration and control is then delegated to that trustee, which is responsible for the policies and operation of the domain. The current delegation can be determined from IANA's list of ccTLDs. Individual ccTLDs may have varying requirements and fees for registering subdomains. There may be a local presence requirement (for instance, citizenship or other connection to the ccTLD), as for example the Canadian (ca) and German (de) domains, or registration may be open.

The first registered ccTLD were .us, .uk, and .il, all registered in 1985. In 1986, .au, .de, .fi, .fr, .jp, .kr, .nl and .se were registered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country_code_top-level_domain

Further reading: https://icannwiki.com/CcTLD

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

equity78 said:
ICANN did not create country codes as a money grab, ICANN was not even created when they were delegated. IANA oversaw their rollout, every country in the world wanted their piece of the web.

IANA is responsible for determining an appropriate trustee for each ccTLD. Administration and control is then delegated to that trustee, which is responsible for the policies and operation of the domain. The current delegation can be determined from IANA's list of ccTLDs. Individual ccTLDs may have varying requirements and fees for registering subdomains. There may be a local presence requirement (for instance, citizenship or other connection to the ccTLD), as for example the Canadian (ca) and German (de) domains, or registration may be open.

The first registered ccTLD were .us, .uk, and .il, all registered in 1985. In 1986, .au, .de, .fi, .fr, .jp, .kr, .nl and .se were registered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Country_code_top-level_domain

Further reading: https://icannwiki.com/CcTLD

If new gTLD's are considered a money grab then cctlds would too, in today's time of course.

equity78 · Aug 24, 2016

mad409 said:
If new gTLD's are considered a money grab then cctlds would too, in today's time of course.

Well I can't agree with that because it actually happened and it wasn't a money grab. That's not based on opinion, those strings go back to the 80's there was no money to grab. Domain names were free into the 90's.

The new gtlds are a complex animal, the problem is there are few fair and balanced conversations. Look ICANN wanted to be independent and it costs a lot of money to be your own sovereign nation, so to speak. They handled the program for money first in the eyes of many. I think they could have done a better job like singular or plural but not both as one example.

dordomai · Aug 24, 2016

mad409 said:
Doesn't matter when cctlds were added, it's still a keyword money grab per your opinion and nothing different than new gTLDs.

Your position is clear, anything is a keyword ICANN money grab as you stated other than what .com?

You're really going back into the time machine now, if I'm correct I'm thinking .us had restrictions back then.

Sorry I can't understand this reasoning. ccTLDs were launched before the commercial internet for obviously non-commercial reasons. A few became commercialized e.g .ws, .pw. .tv etc. Most weren't.

Generally ccTLDs don't promote themselves. They won't be shut-down regardless of profitability.

ccTLDs already existed long before ICANN:

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

Failing to discuss cctlds that have opened up to everyone recently, not sure why. Only old news and links..

One example; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.ky

dordomai · Aug 24, 2016

mad409 said:
Failing to discuss cctlds that have opened up to everyone recently, not sure why. Only old news and links..

One example; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.ky

This still missed the point. The question was if the string launched was really needed or if it was launched to make money only. Even if a ccTLD opens up that doesn't change the fact that it was launched because it had a real purpose and tried to solve a real problem not because it was a money grab.

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

dordomai said:
This still missed the point. The question was if the string launched was really needed or if it was launched to make money only. Even if a ccTLD opens up that doesn't change the fact that it was launched because it had a real purpose not a money grab.

Nope spot on, I was replying to Kate's reply that gTLDs are a money grab. All cctlds that opened up to people like me, later, that would be a money grab too. Had to be approved by ICANN for more keyword regs within their extension, rule changes.

No debate there...

dordomai · Aug 24, 2016

mad409 said:
Nope spot on, I was replying to Kate's reply that gTLDs are a money grab. All cctlds that opened up to people like me, later, that would be a money grab too. Had to be approved by ICANN for more keyword regs within their extension.

No debate there...

ccTLDs are not a money grab because they fullfill a real purpose and the main purpose is not to make money but to provide a local country extension.

The main purpose of nTLDs was to make money for ICANN and registry investors.

https://www.dynadot.com/domain/search.html?domain=crap.live&search=

mad409 · Aug 24, 2016

dordomai said:
ccTLDs are not a money grab because they fullfill a real purpose and the main purpose is not to make money but to provide a local country extension.

The main purpose of nTLDs was to make money for ICANN and registry investors.

https://www.dynadot.com/domain/search.html?domain=crap.luxury&search=

Like I figured, not a solid reply to the debate.

BrandClub.com · Aug 24, 2016

tomcarl said:
In the last couple of months, I've had a couple of people try to bring up other TLDs during negotiations. One was for .blog another was .io

I find these so easy to rebuttal that I now almost welcome these "gTLD" objections. It opens a door for me to better elaborate on the value of my domain.

For the .io guy, who told me he can get the same name on .io for $30, I sent him a link to the sale of Agario.com, a domain that once had next to no liquid value or type-ins, now gets a ton of free traffic, and sold for $10K in an auction simply because of the popularity of Agar.io. I sincerely wished him the best of luck with the popularity of new project using .io. In response he increased his offer substantially than his initial lowball (which was still less than what I would consider, he was a small-time app developer and just didn't have the budget). Till this day, the .io version of my domain remains unregistered. He probably opted for another .com within his budget.

For the .blog guy, I replied the same, but this time also referred him to Twitch.com which was acquired by Amazon after acquiring Twitch.tv, and also educated him on the fact that there was no way that the keyword.blog equivalent of my domain was going to be available for a standard regfee (it's a 3-letter 1-word), it'll be either taken by another investor or have a premium renewal, not to mention increase the value of my domain should his blog become a success. They emailed me a week later with a higher offer, again one I don't care to accept.

So just a word of advice when negotiating, gTLDs make your domains more valuable folks, not less. People just have budgets to work with and have new options to settle for, and for those who settle and find a gtld will help them be looked at as "innovators" and will "stand out" - Go right ahead, you're driving up traffic and demand for a keyword or phrase available on thousands of other extensions, including the .com that is sitting there getting more traffic than it originally did, waiting to be purchased, likely by another innovator with a bigger budget.

Twitch.com has definitely more value than Twitch.tv but IMO Twitch.tv has far more value than TwitchTV.com

Same thing for your .blog domain ...
Let´s say your domain is TradingBlog.com ...
IMO Trading.blog has more value than the 2 words .COM domain because is shorter, more specific and is a ONE word domain name, so comparable to Trading.com as well ...

New gTLDs that make sense together KEYWORD+EXTENSION have more value (or will have more value over the years / they are not well known right now) than the matching 2 words .COM domain.
Internet is changing and new generations will definitely adopt the New gTLDs which still in their infancy ...
Just my opinion !!!

Why I love end-users bringing up GTLD alternatives...

Top Member

Established Member

GorgeousAI.comTop Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

standforUkraine.comTop Member

Top Member

:(Top Member

Domainosaurus RexTop Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

Top Member

Top Member

Domainosaurus RexTop Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

Domainosaurus RexTop Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

Top Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

Top Member

Top Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

Top Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

Top Member

Always thinking outside the box!Top Member

Account Closed (Requested)

Similar threads

We're social

Pinned

Appreciation

Agreement