So are you Ready For Hundreds of New Domain Extensions?
During the ICANN Meeting in Paris this week, ICANN annouced that it was seriously considering whether to opening up domain names to endless variations and approve hundreds of new extensions including .berlin, .paris, .quebec .cat (for Catalonia) and one for the big apple, .nyc
“We’re talking about introducing potentially thousands more names,” said Paul Levins, executive officer of Icann “The addressing system hasn’t fundamentally changed since its invention. These changes have the potential to have a huge impact on the way we express ourselves on the Net.”
Icann’s board is poised to vote on whether to set up the broad criteria for approving new domain names with limitless possibilities. It would allow companies to turn their own brands into domains or to create broad product groups such as .car, .sports or .bank.
Ebay is already a contender to use its name, according to Levins, who added, “You can imagine the branding opportunities.”
So is everyone ready for .ebay??
It is now expected that ICANN will adopt a new system, which would set in motion a process that eventually would start to open up the Internet to hundreds of new names by the beginning of next year.
Icann estimated that only 17 percent of an available pool of 4 billion network addresses remained, and they are expected to run out in the next five years.
The application fee for a domain name has not been set, but candidates estimate that it could range from $39,000 to $390,000.
Icann is also prepared to set up an auction system if competing groups bid for the same name.
Private companies would reap their profit by selling the domain names to registrars, which would then sell them to individual customers.
Icann is also setting up standards that would allow the regulator to reject applications from people who try to grab trademarked names or to rebuff proposals on moral grounds or because of community objections.
“They’ve discussed scenarios where someone wants to have .football and how to cope with it if it means soccer or football. And they’ve also talked about what happens if someone proposes .jihad,” said Lenz-Hawliczek, from the Berlin project. “It’s a really complex issue, and we’ve been discussing it for the past three years. It’s not easy.”
With hundreds of new extensions what would the effect be on the valuation of exsiting extensions?
Our guess, .com’s maybe become even more valuable as confusion will reign when people have too many choices, they will naturally default back to .com’s.
County codes would be much less valuable as every major world city will get their own extension.
extensions like .info, .biz will suffer.
.Net’s I think are also in jeopardy of devaluation.
.Org’s I think will be have the most stable valuation after .Com’s
Geo domains might be at the most risk.
Is Brooklyn.com as valuable if there is a Brooklyn.nyc?
One thing is for certain.
For trademark holders, domainers and anyone else who want to protect their brand, its going to get very expensive to register hundreds maybe thousands of domains using different extensions.
And if companies are allowed their own extension, what a money maker it would be.
People will be lining up to get their personal and/or business name.
mike.ebay or mike.google
Got to love those.
Loading ...
Hugh,
Regarding dilution, you can flood the market with as many $2,000 cars as you want but the demand for $500,000 Ferrari’s and Lamborghini’s will not be affected. You can sell sex.biz, sex.bz, sexdotwhateverextensions you want but sex.com still sold for $14M last year.
How many years have .net, .org, .info, .biz, etc along with the dozens of ccTLDs been around? And yet, when you look at reported .com sales, they just keep appreciating.
You can flood the market with thousands of TLDs but the average Joe and Jane still only knows .com when they think of the internet. The vanity and niche TLDs will be nice and all but the small business end user and big corporation alike will want the .com for their internet presence. There is no substitute for quality no matter how much fluff there is out there.
Hugh, thank you, sincerely and feel free to email me.
In 13 months…4,000 pages of research, 5 notebooks, 14 ink cartridges, 1 computer, 10-16 hours a day, many lost friends,…and 3,000 domains later…i’ve earned my badge, and I’m not going anywhere.
NY
Time for fun is over guys check out the post I just made.
E-mails are going out, looking like its from icann and they are pointing you to a site where they want you to give them your domain, user id and password.
The site they are promoting is not an obvious phishing domain.
Please read the post
Actually, it was Jan. 2006, and it was 12 mm and stock.
Excellent analogy, Tony.
And, for that matter, irrespective of other deluded buyers in the aftermarket, television is on the wane.
For the record, I spent three years in the TV industry. I co-wrote the first on-demand applications for DVB-T and demonstrated them at CommunicAsia in 1998. If you think I’m out-of-touch, you better take a look in the mirror.
Chris,
I don’t care if you were the best man at Bill Gates wedding.
By CLEARLY not knowing about those major investments, acquisitions and developments within the space, it CLEARLY indicated YOU were the one OUT-OF-TOUCH…
NY, you conveniently avoided my question. Show me actual, money-in-the-bank DOMAIN sales.
Hear is the deal guys if one network applies for there own extension all others will follow and .tv is done.
It may or may not happen, but the ramification of any one network moving in this direction will adversely effect .tv
Its risk and reward. I see a lot of risk with .tv not too much reward
Golf.TV–$600,000
Vegas.TV–$350,000
China.TV–$100,000
Net.TV–$100,000
Free.TV–$100,000
Property.TV–$100,000
Travel.TV–$65,000
Hot.TV–$35,000
Mail.TV–$35,000
Fussball.TV–$28,367
Surface.TV–$27,000
Six.TV–$25,000
AuctionNetwork.TV–$25,000
TelMex.TV–$25,000
…Isn’t it funny how you didn’t ask about the thousands of people that were WILLING and ABLE to purchase DOT TV premiums with ANNUAL renewal fees? IT IS MERELY a cost of doing business–and WELL worth the “investment” for particular premium domains. So, no my friend, YOU WERE THE ONE avoiding the reality…
Again you’re wrong Tony!
Like NY pointed out earlier, .com gave the web a very good head start a bit like my lovely country England used to rule the world! Hey, we even controlled North America at one point and almost 2/3rds of mother earth. And then one day came the big U.S of A and said …ur time is up your majesty, you shall now relinquish your empire and crawl back into your little hole!
Well, that is what is going to happen to .com in very colloquial terms! fact is Visuals, Video and Television is more imbedded in human minds, even microsoft will role out IPTV, note the TV! a merge between internet and television.
So Tony, you may think .com will always be the best because sex.com sold for $14 million, I’d place my bet with you today that Sex.tv would make far more revenue as a developed site…and that’s the point!
…again, terrible rebuttal Admin (no offense obviously).
DOT TV is not exclusive to major networks–what about entertainment, interactivity, VIDEO, LIVE streaming…webcasting, etc…
And…I couldn’t disagree more. DOT TV is the BEST bang for your BUCK in this current market on the planet EARTH. Again, Chris, believe what you may, but lack of education and comprehension for the space doesn’t apply to factual evidence. MAJOR NETWORKS, period.
Well to quote tony why would nbc want .nbc when they have the quality, And no David it is not a good analogy because a Ferrari is a superior actual real piece of machinery. Letters in a browser are all the same. And no the whole world doesn’t want .com a lot of the world hates .com domainers and has pushed for these type of domains so they do not have to pay .com prices. NICE TRY NEXT
The Golf.tv was never confirmed. Most of the others were regged in the so-called “landrush” last year, and I’m willing to bet a few people are regretting their “investment”. $1 million in total sales is pretty lame – I’ve sold a single .COM for more than that.
I’m not talking just about the major networks but about every cable station you watch.
Once all networks and cable stations join in, that pretty much is television.
Your telling me fox wouldn’t spend the $250K just to have an address idol.fox, and nfl.fox
NY
BTW my name is Michael.
The NFL might have a problem with FOX using NFL.fox
I humbly sold JazzOn.tv for a tidy sum of $4,500…I’m chuffed!
Hugh, letters in a browser may be the same, but your grammar is appalling.
and I thought the .mobi guys were outspoken
And the whole UDRP, tm protection could get screwed, because if I start .sports can I use the NFL trademark NFL.sports. Looks like a bad faith registration to confuse the user who wanted the website of the National Football League.
LOL@Mike
Typing fast sorry on 18 sites, it might be but not as appalling as your intellect.
Hugh
Not when fox pays billions for the rights to carry the games.
Fox uses NFL all time in the broadcasting and site
Think they call it the NFL on Fox
True but you do not think the NFL would not want the confusion of NFL.fox. I know you get rights when you license but seems like it is diluting the UDRP on bad faith and confusion.
Well, congratulations your card is in the mail. Sent yesterday.
I sent it from one of the 9 countries I have visited, where it would not be a rarity to hear, “dot what”…because of their ccTLD is ALL they care about. DOT COM means about as much as a bag of hammers. However, if you visited eastern Cambodia and drew “TV” in sheep blood on the chalk board in front of a group of kids with a school hut made of mud and sticks they would still know to point to a “TV”…
The next generation of content delivery is here Chris, and even though you can not accept FACTS, the FACTS are that as I mentioned earlier, .TV will continue to grow, quarter after quarter, and with time, education and development, will be a “must see/must have” tld…and thus, I congratulate those with the open-minded ambitions to see the light.
I’ll foward you Dr. Hartnetts email, I’m sure he’d love to pay you for your consultations.
Just got my second notice from these guys.
I would hate to see any of our fellow domainers get tricked into giving info and losing their domains.
I worry more about the average Joe who doesn’t know any better and doesn’t read the blog.
Admin:
I agree, nothing wrong with lively debate, I just see too many people missing the point of where all this is going.
I have been reading your blog daily for the past few months. IMO bar none you have to the top blog in the business. Keep up the great work!
To your last post: Why would a network having their own TLD adversely affect .TV?
The general public is not going to reg Travel.FOX or Hollywood.NBC
That is a corporate identity.
.TV is already being used and branded across all networks and users worldwide as we speak.
It is the opposite, the more fragmented these network guys get the better for the generic category killer for online video which is .TV.
Owning the .tv is the only way to get the universal TLD that now means Television.
Same with anyone trying to use .Television or .Video or .Tube
Same argument. No company in their right mind would brand and use a .Television without owning the .TV, I would love for .Television to come on the scene.
No other TLD can beat “TV” and what it stands for. The minute people acknowledge any alternative is needed for online video besides .com (.video .tube .channel) which is happening then .TV wins. It defies logic and what is already being proven to think otherwise.
Not sure why people seem to think the letters “TV” are going anywhere. They came several decades before .com and may be there several decades after.
Once again, .TV and .com will both be successful unless we as a collective group drop the ball.
The best content and development in each market will carry the day long term.
Those that think PPC will last forever are mistaken.
Michael are you standing by your initial post that the Geo .com domains have the most to worry about or have the GEO spin doctors changed your mind. Honest question, I have nothing against Geo.com in any way.
NY, I don’t disagree that online media will grow. The point you are missing is that online media is not now called “TV” nor will it be. You’re buying into a term that will not be used online at a time when offline TV is in decline. You may as well have bought .MORSECODE
.VIEWMASTER
http://www.edcenter.sdsu.edu/cs575viz/viewmaster.gif
And I’ll refer you one last time to “the graph”:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=tv%2Ctube
Brian
Just to be clear:
I don’t think the term TV is going away.
That was expressed by others.
I don’t think PPC will be around forever.
Never did.
Matter of fact, I already expressed the thought that if the Yahoo-Google deal goes through (which has a very good chance) I think PPC is going to end shortly thereafter for all practical purposes.
.TV is not bad. Never said it was.
All I said is I don’t think having 300 more extensions is going to help any extension.
However .com’s and .org’s will be the least effected.
Really, so that guy today looking to sell me a 50 inch rectangle picture viewing machine, he called it a TV.
OH SPIKE TV
Frank TV
Cable Tv
Pay Tv
IPTV
MTV oh M tube or M video
This is so funny now it borders on insanity, or mandatory drug testing.
NY you already knocked him out in this verbal spar now its not even sporting its just absolutely pathetic
Your last post should be a misdemeanor, at least. I am leaving now.
I had a BLAST TODAY, thanks everyone! I *SINCERELY, and very *HONESTLY no one took personal offense to our social gathering tonight.
I do wish everyone the best and hope to meet some of you in the future.
NY
…For the road.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.clipartof.com/images/clipart/xsmall2/10756_blind_man_with_a_cane_and_guide_dog.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.clipartof.com/details/clipart/10756.html&h=416&w=450&sz=89&hl=en&start=33&tbnid=zjGKl3-VOx8BLM:&tbnh=117&tbnw=127&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblind%2Bman%2B%26start%3D21%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D21%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN
Hugh
My understanding of Geo domains is they are not limited to just the name of cities, towns, states and countries.
How about newyorkdoctors.com
It’s a geo name right?
Now if there is a .nyc and a .doctor extension, does that make newyorkdoctors more or less valuable?
Someone could register doctor.nyc or newyork.doctor
The value of Domains lies in great part to their uniqueness. The more variations the less uniqueness.
If there was a .lawyer extension I think all lawyer related .com lose value and I own a ton of those.
NY
See you next time
thanks for your thoughts
Thank you Michael
I’m out for tonight
Thank to Steve Morales who started this mess out yesterday with the first comment.
What out for those fake ICANN e-mail.
Back tomorrow
David
The best time for .TV is right now – not in the future.
Why? Because it is quickly becoming an archaic term with the 30 and under demographic. They don’t say telephone, they say cell phone. They don’t say record album, they say CD. And they don’t say television
If want to talk outdated (you cold be an .com owner) we do not call these thinks any more CD’s they are dvd’s and now disk’s (blue Ray mainly) your kids must be older then me.
The world is taking over the internet and it might not be the .com but more the RU, UK, NL,FR, ES, PL, CN, IT, IN and most likely a host of other domain names important to the rest of the world.
The domains are no longer governed by an exclusive US club and changes will happen very fast.
I believe in a business mdel, a name is just an domain till you make it a store and create business weather it be .TV business, .Com Business are Ca it the BUSINESS
I may be living in Dreamworld.TV however it beets the bubble.com
Hugh, you only think you’re right. Answer these questions honestly:
1) Do you think some sort of media center or PC will replace the receiver in your living room? I hope the answer is yes – it’s fairly obvious that on-demand IP-based video is the way we’re heading.
2) if you have kids, they probably download videos. Do they sit at the computer and say “I’m watching TV!”? My guess is they don’t.
3) Do you agree that the phrase “tube” has rapidly overtaken “TV” online?
Put it all together.
Soon the guy at the store won’t sell you a “TV”, he’ll sell you a screen for your PC. They’re already called “Flat Screen TVs” – how long until they drop the “TV” and call it a “flat screen”? Oh, wait, they already do.
By the way, .TV has been around since 96, and I can certainly remember people trying to hock them on the old Afternic in the late 90’s. 10+ years and one half-hearted relaunch, but they still suck.
Ben:
Sorry, the appetizers are gone and the bar is no longer serving drinks.
Wow a legend Ben Van Dyk, I have followed you and Farm.tv for a long time, Hello Ben. Best of luck.
The only tube people refer to is You Tube, obviously where all the juice for the word tube comes from.
Here they call them flat screen TV’s and speaking to a vp for SONY USA, who I asked when will they stop being called TV’s ? He replied Wtf are you talking about?
Well I vote for flatscreenTelevisions.com
since I own that one.
and I got us to 150
The value of Domains lies in great part to their uniqueness. The more variations the less uniqueness.
Exactly right Michael and .com has a lot of competition coming its way. Even if it is the Ferrari ( YOU GOT TO LAUGH ITS HYSTERICAL) of the internet. At the end of the day its about creating businesses 10 years from now people will ask, WTF is a domainer? DEVELOPMENT IS THE KEY IMO
Hugh, maybe the VP for Sony is an out-of-touch old guy too. You didn’t answer my questions by the way, which seems to be a common problem with pro-TV people.
The “tube” graph is simply to point out to you that your beloved term “TV” is outdated, certainly online, and probably offline soon. In the last two years, Youtube has un-done what television took 60 years to accomplish. In the time it takes .TV to gain any ground (it’s been over 10 years already and you’ve seen the .COM vs .TV graph), it will be a term that no-one uses online.
Suck it up.