New gTLDs - Why No Discussions Here?

addz123 · Feb 22, 2013

First of all, I'm not looking to cause panic or be negative etc.

But I was just wondering how come I've not seen any discussions or threads here on Acorn about the new gTLDs that are coming out later this year.

I've personally been obsessed with this issue. I've now set my Google Alerts to the latest gTLDs and read every single article, trying to work out how popular or soon they will take off, so I guess I just want to start a discussion and get peoples opinions on them.

I've probably done more research then most people on this forum out of obsessiveness, so here's some points or opinions I found interesting. I'm happy to listen to any responses to them.

1. New gTLDs will increase value of .com and potentially .co.uk (obviously can't really comment on uk until .uk consultation is over). I've read on DNJournal and others that the more .whatevers you have, the more confusion it creates and the more it promotes .com as the no.1 resource. Obviously the more .whatevers you have then the more traffic leakage and potential customers you have for the .com too.

2. Previous descriptive gTLDs such as .museum, .mobi, .trave, .jobs, .aero, .biz have failed relative to .com/net/org popularity. Some people including myself have used this for an excuse why the new gTLDs will also fail, however I don't think that's a fair comparison now because it's going to be 100s-1,000s new gTLDs which will inevitably cause some sort of change to how we search and view brands on the internet, as opposed to just a handful which can easily be ignored.

3. Part of me thinks the new gTLD program "should" fail. Too many new gTLDs being released all at the same time (20 per week), can create tons of consumer confusion and is there really a big need for them? Do we need .Money, .Financial, .Investments etc etc?

But then I think well there's too many being released and we're too far into this to go back. The future of the internet and domains/brands has already been set in motion and it's only a matter of time before we're forced to adopt the new gTLDs into everyday culture. E.g. .Apps makes a lot of sense, something like Rihanna.Music makes sense, .Law definitely makes sense imo (surprised it wasn't already a gTLD). And then I can see stuff like London.Golf, Sheffield.Golf, Wonga.Loans also making some sense.

Plus the amount of money going into the new gTLds. Google, Amazon and Donuts have invested hundres of millions of dollars iton these new gTLDs (Donuts have some of the smartest internet/domain space people around from what I can tell so I assume they know what they're doing with their money) makes me think the new gTLDs must be successful.

4. I feel like new gTLDs will reduce value of EMDs, including premium ones. It's just a gut feeling. This is based on the fact that I think in order to promote a brand on a new gTLD is needs to have a brand at the 2nd level in order to differentiate from the generic gTLD. For example, something like Learn.Beauty doesn't seem like it will be marketed well, where as Vogue.Beauty, Oh.Beauty or BooHoo.Beauty might. I just can't see generic terms with a gTLD working. e.g. Money.Investment or Football.Sport doesn't have the same brandable ring to it as Money.co.uk or Football.com imo.

5. From an SEO point of view, I'm still a little confused. What I mean is, will the gTLD be viewed as part of the brand name. If I had Learn.SpreadBetting for example, would that rank for "learn spread betting" or would search engines just view the brand as "learn" and know that it's in the spread betting niche. The same thing with Personal.Loans for example. If we assumed Google generally treats all gTLDs with the same authority, then it would just treat Personal.Loans the same as Personal.com. This means it would look like the brand is just called "personal". Does that make sense?

6. From a domain investors point of view, I'm sure everyone has their opinion, but overall with over 1,000 new gTLDs set to be launched in 2013/14, surely there's too many possible domain extensions and 2nd level registrations to make investments worthwhile?

I've heard this could be a new gold mine for people in our industry (afterall, imagine being there when .com first launched) but would domainers even know where to begin? For example, when the .co came out, people made their bets. But if rather than 1 new extension you have 100s new extensions all being released simulataneously I don't understand how people can find long term investments (I read on DNJournal a comment that they'll be good short-term flipping but he couldn't see any long term holdings).

7. One of the reasons I personally just can't see .com and in some cases other existing gTLDs and ccTLDs being replaced is just the sheer number of big brands using it. For example, Facebook.com, Google.com, Wikipedia.org, Youtube.com, Twitter.com, BBC.co.uk, Yahoo.com, Mashable.com, TechCrunch.com, etc etc etc.

I mean unless they all use their .brand (which I still don't think makes that much sense as I think Facebook.com for example makes more sense than Home.Facebook) surely these guys arn't going to depart from .com? It's not like Facebook is going to migrate to Facebook.Social anytime soon or has any reason to.

But then that makes me even more confused because if .com and .co.uk remain as pinnacles for big business, why would anyone bother using desciptive gTLDS such as .accountants or .money given the choice?

Perhaps only small businesses would use the gTLDs who can't afford a nice looking .com or .co.uk? idk.

8. Do the new gTLD registrants even have the money to market and promote their new gTLDs to consumers? I can't even imagine how much money would be required to overcome the prevailing dominance of the .com/co.uk/org/net.

9. Who will be the first adopters of the new gTLDs? I was amazed at the fact that there are sites that have been using .travel for the last 5 years that I havn't even heard about.

10. Just wanted to say, I do see certain value in some domains such as .London, especially as localised and mobile search becomes more important. I'm also a fan of .Apps, .Law, .Eco etc.

It's just the sheer number of gTLDs being released in a short space of time which I think will be messy, create confusion for businesses, consumers and marketeers, cause cyber squatting issues on a whole new paradigm, and overall the majority of the gTLDs just seem unneccessary. I hate the fact that branding a business online could become so much more difficult. For example, look at the US network ABC. I'm assuming they have a trademark, but imagine they didn't, and then you had ABC.web, ABC.family, ABC.health, ABC.marketing, ABC.blogs, ABC.apps, ABC.sport, ABC.london, ABC.tennis, ABC.school.

Do you see what I meant? If you have a trademark brand, you're fucked fighting cybersquatters and protecting your brand. If you don't have a brand, then you could end up with your business name registered in a dozen other new extensions, making you harder to find online.

My company is called ARG Media. ARG.co.uk shows up when I search for it. What's going to happen when ARG.sport, ARG.marketing, ARG.online, ARG.web, ARG.mobile, ARG.app etc all rank too?

My honest opinion is that I don't see how it's going to be possible to brand a company online anymore. There's just too much confusion and dilution.

doodlebug · Feb 22, 2013

All these extensions are rubbish, I'm not even concerned about. uk hence why I havn't commented on the ever growing thread.

GreyWing · Feb 23, 2013

Most will be at risk of being shut off like gb.net gb.com or whatever it was when Steve Dyer decided to pull them down for whatever reason.

Others will go bust, after making millions at landrush, leaving web owners in limbo, mathematical certainty.

I don't think anyone will launch their own .gld without owning the .com version. .BBC .Facebook is fine, but they wouldn't do it unless they had the .com version in my opinion. Too much brand confusion.

Edwin · Feb 23, 2013

I think it only seems like there's not much discussion about it because a lot of the discussion took place a year or more ago. The new GTLD are now a done deal, and everyone's in a holding pattern waiting for the first ones to be released in regular batches. But that doesn't mean anything that was discussed a while back (when the concept was first raised, and during the application and review processes) is irrelevant. There's no "new news" if you like, so it appears something of a dormant topic for now.

But for instance, here's an article that I wrote in October 2011 http://www.webmastering.co.uk/uncategorized/the-new-brand-tlds-are-destined-to-fail/

There were a couple of threads on here as well...
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/general-board/104143-new-tlds.html
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/business-discussions/92455-dot-brand-launch-bbcs-report-friday.html

Bottom line, they looked like an epic fail when they were first announced (except for ICANN, branding consultants, lawyers and the registries running some of the more obvious new gtlds, who all stand to profit) and they still do now i.e. nothing that's happened in the last couple of years has magically made the concept of new gtld any more appealing (and indeed .com, .co.uk and .cctld of countries where cctld have a strong presence have all had another 18 months of establishing themselves as the de-facto extensions for those markets)

Bottom line, it costs perhaps US$500,000 to get a new gtld off the ground (including application fee, legal costs, tech costs, and the blood money you have to hand to ICANN in advance just so that they will agree that you're "ok" as a registry) which, if your domains are priced at US$50/year, represents just 10,000 registrations. If you come up with an extension that's superficially appealing, if you get an initial flurry of 20,000 registrations in that extension you've just doubled your money. The fact that the new gtld itself will have exactly ZERO mindshare going forward is not YOUR problem if you're the registry. I'm sure behind closed doors a lot of such calculations have taken place, especially for the "mega play" companies i.e. those that are going for dozens or hundreds of extensions. Once the new GTLD is up and running, you only need in the low thousands of registrations going forward to see a profit each year, since you can run any number of extensions on the same registry platform, supported by the same customer service team.

There is a huge difference between "something that makes money" and "something that makes sense". The new gtld programme will definitely make money for a small number of closely related interests, but it makes no sense as a concept because it will be met with a collective shrug of disinterest/disdain/confusion by the wider business community and the general public.

BTW, every word of the previous paragraph applies to Nominet and direct.uk!

foz · Feb 23, 2013

Is General Motors bowing out of ICANN’s new gTLD program completely? It’s certainly looking that way, following the withdrawal of two more of its five original applications.

If it turns out a large number of companies applied for dot-brands purely defensively (I wouldn’t consider 12 to 17 withdrawals a large number) then ICANN may have to rethink how the program is structured.

http://domainincite.com/11909-pile-...ampaign=Feed:+DomainIncite+(DomainIncite.com)

murph · Feb 23, 2013

Interesting comment on that post... "Reputation-protection service" ... Perhaps should be "reputation-protection racket"

Edwin · Feb 23, 2013

murph said:
Interesting comment on that post... "Reputation-protection service" ... Perhaps should be "reputation-protection racket"

Again, just like direct.uk! (brands will be forced to obtain their domain name in .uk at any price to protect their .co.uk investment and avoid confusion)

addz123 · Feb 23, 2013

Thanks for the links Edwin, enjoyed reading them.

What's your opinion on this:

". From an SEO point of view, I'm still a little confused. What I mean is, will the gTLD be viewed as part of the brand name. If I had Learn.SpreadBetting for example, would that rank for "learn spread betting" or would search engines just view the brand as "learn" and know that it's in the spread betting niche. The same thing with Personal.Loans for example. If we assumed Google generally treats all gTLDs with the same authority, then it would just treat Personal.Loans the same as Personal.com. This means it would look like the brand is just called "personal". Does that make sense?"

murph · Feb 23, 2013

I would say the extension will be taken into account as a keyword. Perhaps this was the kick that G needed to ditch the EMD emphasis

Edwin · Feb 23, 2013

murph said:
I would say the extension will be taken into account as a keyword. Perhaps this was the kick that G needed to ditch the EMD emphasis

I would say the opposite. Google's not going to give a lot of credence to the 1,000 completely new, untried, untested gtlds that are going to be launched in the first batch. Why should they?

foz · Feb 23, 2013

Edwin said:
I would say the opposite. Google's not going to give a lot of credence to the 1,000 completely new, untried, untested gtlds that are going to be launched in the first batch. Why should they?

Because they will own quite a few themselves?

http://www.newtlds.com/applications

http://www.internetnews.com/blog/sk...road-registry-the-leading-gtld-applicant.html

Edwin · Feb 23, 2013

foz said:
Because they will own quite a few themselves?

http://www.newtlds.com/applications

http://www.internetnews.com/blog/sk...road-registry-the-leading-gtld-applicant.html

And given that they are fighting multiple lawsuits in many jurisdictions about their current "bias" towards Google in-house products in the SERPS results, and losing a number of them, I can't imagine that they'd want to throw petrol on the fire by demonstrably favouring their own gtlds!

foz · Feb 23, 2013

Edwin said:
And given that they are fighting multiple lawsuits in many jurisdictions about their current "bias" towards Google in-house products in the SERPS results, and losing a number of them, I can't imagine that they'd want to throw petrol on the fire by demonstrably favouring their own gtlds!

I would imagine if you sign up with Gmail you would be offered one for free. If not, they certainly have the eyeballs on their products to integrate them and produce significant uptake quickly, more so than the launches of the .info's and biz's of the past.

addz123 · Feb 23, 2013

murph said:
I would say the extension will be taken into account as a keyword. Perhaps this was the kick that G needed to ditch the EMD emphasis

I agree with Edwin. Surely if it's an extension than it should be treated the same as any other extension and not a keyword. Afterall, the brand name for Money.co.uk is "Money", it's not Money Co Uk. Likewise, the brand for Personal.Loans should be "personal" just like it would on Personal.co.uk or Personal.info.

This then means the only way for a new gTLD to work is to have a brandname.whatever. But then if you could afford it and it was a unique brand then you'd get the .com/co.uk anway.

murph · Feb 23, 2013

I see what you mean. It'll be interesting to see how it pans out!

julian · Feb 24, 2013

The .UK thing is the biggest kick up the arse i've ever had in domaining.

I've binned off hundereds of .uk domains and completey moved away from from investing in .co.uk (or any other shitty cctld) and go only for the classic tld extensions - but I do think some of the new tlds will become naturally very strong and to ignore it all would be very risky.

Of course i've still got a vested interest in what happens to .co.uk and still ever the opportunist for a dirty little .co.uk hand-reg (and always will be)

All my new projects I try to aim global (if possible). I've realised that 10 years of obsessign over .co.uk has meant a lot of missed opportunities when its all there for the taking else where - you don't even need a 'generic', 'exacts', 'keywords' (vomits in bin) or any of that hyped up shit to make things happen.

The thing is you can be a big player in a small pond for a relatively small amount of risk and investment with a good .co.uk - but that's all its ever going to be - and there's nowt wrong with that... until the game changes.

All I can say is i'm not being taken down to china town this time round...capisce sweethearts?

addz123 said:
First of all, I'm not looking to cause panic or be negative etc.

But I was just wondering how come I've not seen any discussions or threads here on Acorn about the new gTLDs that are coming out later this year.

I've personally been obsessed with this issue. I've now set my Google Alerts to the latest gTLDs and read every single article, trying to work out how popular or soon they will take off, so I guess I just want to start a discussion and get peoples opinions on them.

I've probably done more research then most people on this forum out of obsessiveness, so here's some points or opinions I found interesting. I'm happy to listen to any responses to them.

1. New gTLDs will increase value of .com and potentially .co.uk (obviously can't really comment on uk until .uk consultation is over). I've read on DNJournal and others that the more .whatevers you have, the more confusion it creates and the more it promotes .com as the no.1 resource. Obviously the more .whatevers you have then the more traffic leakage and potential customers you have for the .com too.

2. Previous descriptive gTLDs such as .museum, .mobi, .trave, .jobs, .aero, .biz have failed relative to .com/net/org popularity. Some people including myself have used this for an excuse why the new gTLDs will also fail, however I don't think that's a fair comparison now because it's going to be 100s-1,000s new gTLDs which will inevitably cause some sort of change to how we search and view brands on the internet, as opposed to just a handful which can easily be ignored.

3. Part of me thinks the new gTLD program "should" fail. Too many new gTLDs being released all at the same time (20 per week), can create tons of consumer confusion and is there really a big need for them? Do we need .Money, .Financial, .Investments etc etc?

But then I think well there's too many being released and we're too far into this to go back. The future of the internet and domains/brands has already been set in motion and it's only a matter of time before we're forced to adopt the new gTLDs into everyday culture. E.g. .Apps makes a lot of sense, something like Rihanna.Music makes sense, .Law definitely makes sense imo (surprised it wasn't already a gTLD). And then I can see stuff like London.Golf, Sheffield.Golf, Wonga.Loans also making some sense.

Plus the amount of money going into the new gTLds. Google, Amazon and Donuts have invested hundres of millions of dollars iton these new gTLDs (Donuts have some of the smartest internet/domain space people around from what I can tell so I assume they know what they're doing with their money) makes me think the new gTLDs must be successful.

4. I feel like new gTLDs will reduce value of EMDs, including premium ones. It's just a gut feeling. This is based on the fact that I think in order to promote a brand on a new gTLD is needs to have a brand at the 2nd level in order to differentiate from the generic gTLD. For example, something like Learn.Beauty doesn't seem like it will be marketed well, where as Vogue.Beauty, Oh.Beauty or BooHoo.Beauty might. I just can't see generic terms with a gTLD working. e.g. Money.Investment or Football.Sport doesn't have the same brandable ring to it as Money.co.uk or Football.com imo.

5. From an SEO point of view, I'm still a little confused. What I mean is, will the gTLD be viewed as part of the brand name. If I had Learn.SpreadBetting for example, would that rank for "learn spread betting" or would search engines just view the brand as "learn" and know that it's in the spread betting niche. The same thing with Personal.Loans for example. If we assumed Google generally treats all gTLDs with the same authority, then it would just treat Personal.Loans the same as Personal.com. This means it would look like the brand is just called "personal". Does that make sense?

6. From a domain investors point of view, I'm sure everyone has their opinion, but overall with over 1,000 new gTLDs set to be launched in 2013/14, surely there's too many possible domain extensions and 2nd level registrations to make investments worthwhile?

I've heard this could be a new gold mine for people in our industry (afterall, imagine being there when .com first launched) but would domainers even know where to begin? For example, when the .co came out, people made their bets. But if rather than 1 new extension you have 100s new extensions all being released simulataneously I don't understand how people can find long term investments (I read on DNJournal a comment that they'll be good short-term flipping but he couldn't see any long term holdings).

7. One of the reasons I personally just can't see .com and in some cases other existing gTLDs and ccTLDs being replaced is just the sheer number of big brands using it. For example, Facebook.com, Google.com, Wikipedia.org, Youtube.com, Twitter.com, BBC.co.uk, Yahoo.com, Mashable.com, TechCrunch.com, etc etc etc.

I mean unless they all use their .brand (which I still don't think makes that much sense as I think Facebook.com for example makes more sense than Home.Facebook) surely these guys arn't going to depart from .com? It's not like Facebook is going to migrate to Facebook.Social anytime soon or has any reason to.

But then that makes me even more confused because if .com and .co.uk remain as pinnacles for big business, why would anyone bother using desciptive gTLDS such as .accountants or .money given the choice?

Perhaps only small businesses would use the gTLDs who can't afford a nice looking .com or .co.uk? idk.

8. Do the new gTLD registrants even have the money to market and promote their new gTLDs to consumers? I can't even imagine how much money would be required to overcome the prevailing dominance of the .com/co.uk/org/net.

9. Who will be the first adopters of the new gTLDs? I was amazed at the fact that there are sites that have been using .travel for the last 5 years that I havn't even heard about.

10. Just wanted to say, I do see certain value in some domains such as .London, especially as localised and mobile search becomes more important. I'm also a fan of .Apps, .Law, .Eco etc.

It's just the sheer number of gTLDs being released in a short space of time which I think will be messy, create confusion for businesses, consumers and marketeers, cause cyber squatting issues on a whole new paradigm, and overall the majority of the gTLDs just seem unneccessary. I hate the fact that branding a business online could become so much more difficult. For example, look at the US network ABC. I'm assuming they have a trademark, but imagine they didn't, and then you had ABC.web, ABC.family, ABC.health, ABC.marketing, ABC.blogs, ABC.apps, ABC.sport, ABC.london, ABC.tennis, ABC.school.

Do you see what I meant? If you have a trademark brand, you're fucked fighting cybersquatters and protecting your brand. If you don't have a brand, then you could end up with your business name registered in a dozen other new extensions, making you harder to find online.

My company is called ARG Media. ARG.co.uk shows up when I search for it. What's going to happen when ARG.sport, ARG.marketing, ARG.online, ARG.web, ARG.mobile, ARG.app etc all rank too?

My honest opinion is that I don't see how it's going to be possible to brand a company online anymore. There's just too much confusion and dilution.

jasman · Feb 25, 2013

I suspect more use will be made of these new tlds by big corporations buying their own extension for their own use rather than registries that plan to sell domains to customers.

I haven't bothered to check who has applied for what as I'm really not that interested but it would make sense for example if facebook gave every user a free username.fb domain or something like that. Likewise twitter. Companies like Google and freewebs.com that want to get more people and businesses online with their own sites will also very likely provide a free domain.

I don't imagine any of the big corporations would abandon their main .com domain though, at least not any time soon, and I suspect they will be watching each other to see how others are using their own extension and how it impacts on their .com usage. But most of them are not particularly .com-centric as regards their brand anyway as they advertise their brand as their name rather than domain name i.e. the Facebook logo is "Facebook" not "Facebook.com", likewise the BBC's website, likewise BMW, likewise most big companies. They have covered all bases - their website is one channel through which they operate, and in fact most of them have many websites. For a giant multinational whose legal team has long since either bought out or reverse hijacked all its gtld and cctld domains, there is no need to mention the domain since they own them all and the norm is for .com to be the main global site, with national cctld sites too and additional .com domains too e.g. bbcshop.com.

An own domain like .coke, .bmw, .samsung etc would enable them to have an unlimited number of nice succinct domains for all kinds of purposes. Probably tracking TV marketing campaigns and promotions etc would be among the most obvious uses, as each campaign could have its own domain but each domain would contain the company's name as extension. But it also makes a lot of sense for mobile phone manufacturers for example to give each mobile phone its own website on its own domain, with a website all about it, hosting its drivers and downloadable manual etc.

For investment purposes I imagine a few of the new tlds that will be run by registries and made available to the public will have some demand. The usual keywords that have commanded 7-figure sums as .com domains would probably do fairly well as extensions e.g. .business, .sex, .loans but unlike .com domains probably only single keyword domains would really be desirable to domain investors e.g. car.loans, because the extension really is like a second keyword that you are forced to have, so really all these domains will have at least 2 keywords even though one is the extension. Who would want something like caronline.loans ? I would say as a rule of thumb, the value of a single keyword domain in a high demand keyword extension like .loans would be about 1% or 2% of the .com equivalent if you got rid of the dot and stuck .com on the end e.g. if carloans.com is worth $1 million then car.loans might be worth ballpark $10k-$20k.

Edwin · Feb 25, 2013

Quite a number of companies have already come forward to get refunds on their new gtld applications, and from what I've seen many more may do so before the March deadline. If they hurry, they can get US$130,000 back if they pull out before March 23. See http://domainincite.com/11909-pile-up-gm-cancels-two-more-new-gtld-bids and http://www.thedomains.com/2013/02/2...applicant-drops-out-this-time-aig-on-chartis/

You can keep an eye on who's dropping out of the new GTLD process, and which strings they're giving up, by going here http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/viewstatus and then selecting Search By: "Application Status" and then choosing "Withdrawn" from the pulldown that appears.

murph · Feb 25, 2013

Edwin said:
You can keep an eye on who's dropping out of the new GTLD process, and which strings they're giving up, by going here http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/viewstatus and then selecting Search By: "Application Status" and then choosing "Withdrawn" from the pulldown that appears.

Thanks for the link, very useful for keeping tabs on this!

foz · Feb 25, 2013

Edwin said:
Quite a number of companies have already come forward to get refunds on their new gtld applications, and from what I've seen many more may do so before the March deadline. If they hurry, they can get US$130,000 back if they pull out before March 23. See http://domainincite.com/11909-pile-up-gm-cancels-two-more-new-gtld-bids and http://www.thedomains.com/2013/02/2...applicant-drops-out-this-time-aig-on-chartis/

You can keep an eye on who's dropping out of the new GTLD process, and which strings they're giving up, by going here http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/viewstatus and then selecting Search By: "Application Status" and then choosing "Withdrawn" from the pulldown that appears.

I hope Nominet pull the plug on .wales and .whatever, what a waste of funds. No doubt .uk will be holding up that side of the business if they do proceed.