• Home
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Awards
  • Privacy Policy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS
TheDomains.com

New gTLD’s All Explained in an 8 Minute Video Which You Will .LOL At

July 17, 2012 by Michael Berkens

For those still confused by the new gTLD’s and all the possibilities they bring to the domain space, video should explain it all to you.

The new gTLD’s naysayers will have a blast.

For the believers you got to still have a sense of humor.

I have no idea who is responsible for the video but hats off to someone who has a a lot of time on their hands and created a worse case scenario for the new gTLD’s.

On the other hand, as I have mentioned before a wise man once told me out of great confusion comes great opportunity.

Enjoy

 

 

 

Filed Under: New gTLD's

About Michael Berkens

Michael Berkens, Esq. is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of TheDomains.com. Michael is also the co-founder of Worldwide Media Inc. which sold around 70K domain to Godaddy.com in December 2015 and now owns around 8K domain names . Michael was also one of the 5 Judges selected for the the Verisign 30th Anniversary .Com contest.

« Afternic.com Sells Just $817,414 In Domains
Trademark Holder Of CompareTheMarket Loses A Second UDRP On CompareTheMarket.XXX »

Comments

  1. Michael Castello says

    July 17, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    Funny! Title could have been “New gTLD’s All Explained in an 8 Second Video”

  2. Tom G says

    July 17, 2012 at 9:07 pm

    Very AndyRooney.esque

    Big religious slant.

    Ooh, those evil new tlds. I’m sure it’s a sign of the apocalypse.

    hilario.us

  3. Ben Elza says

    July 17, 2012 at 9:07 pm

    Excellent.video

  4. .ME Of Course! says

    July 17, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    The project is actually called: Depraved.New.World.Of.Internet.Domains.Scares.Me

  5. RK says

    July 17, 2012 at 9:48 pm

    :).crazy

  6. Paul says

    July 17, 2012 at 10:02 pm

    I got the video’s message in 30 seconds. Which makes the other 7 minutes and 30 seconds of this video overkill (perhaps that was the point).

    Look, I’m not a fan of thousands of proposed gTLD’s either. However, I believe a few gTLD’s have merit. For example, just like dot.org has a useful role/purpose, I believe dot.xxx has a useful role/purpose.

    I would like to see a few extensions, not thousands, which have useful roles/purposes, maintained. Dot.com for general commerce. Dot. org for non-profits. Dot.gov for government. Dot.xxx for adult content. And so on. But even a lot of current extensions seem redundant to me.

    What’s the point of dot.net, dot.biz, dot.co and a host of others? They don’t fulfill a specific role/purpose. Dot.co offers nothing which dot.com does not. It’s just another version of the same thing. It offers no specifc content distinction.

    The same could be said for proposed gTLD’s like dot.web, dot.shop and dot.site. Again, there is no specific content distinction.

    Dot.med for medical professionals? Sure. At least that could serve the role/purpose of being related only to medical content/advice/patients/professionals.

    If I was in charge of granting extensions, I would set some STANDARDS. Does the proposed extension distinguish itself from all others? Does it serve a specific role/purpose? Is that role/purpose broad enough that it demands it’s own extension?

    To use the example above, once you have dot.xxx there’s absolutely no need for dot.sex, dot.adult, or any other adult-related extension, because that becomes redundant. You can apply the same logic to several other broad catagories.

    In summary, I’m no fan of the thousands of proposed gTLD’s either. Then again, I’m not a fan of some of the current gTLD’s. But if anyone thinks dot.com is the only extension with merit that’s absurd. We need several broad, catagory-specific, gTLD’s to help make sense of/organize the web.

    Last example, country specific extensions. Completely unnecessary. The whole point of the web is to unify the World. That Canada has dot.ca is as nonsensical as America having dot.us. Who uses dot.us? Anyone?! We don’t need these distinctions. It’s a global market place. Web content should be divided into catagories, not countries.

    Just my 2 cents.

  7. M says

    July 17, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    First 30 seconds was funny .. the rest was a little over the top. Didn’t mention .COM even once …. looks like a poorly-disguised .ME advertisement!

  8. TMP says

    July 17, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    Very nice, the video actually had a serach bar on the bottom left to signify something

  9. JNet says

    July 17, 2012 at 10:32 pm

    “.LOL”

    Thats’s Priceless !

    But Clearly…….ICANNt’s dubious allowance & enabling of Sooooo Many & Tooooo many TLD’s is really No laughing matter… very irresponsible & ill conceived …. Could really screw up the fluency and overall experience of the Internet… and I’m talk’in bout the “entire net experience” and certainly not sloey the concerns of large domain portfolio holders.

  10. .ME Of Course! says

    July 17, 2012 at 10:32 pm

    Talking about new strings:

  11. .ME Of Course! says

    July 17, 2012 at 10:33 pm

    Of course WP cut the image, so here we go: https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/188225_10150107838755740_3644821_n.jpg

  12. Anunt says

    July 17, 2012 at 11:23 pm

    Stupid.Video

    These new domains are good for the average Joe to use because ALL dot com domains are either gone or cost too much to an average Joe.

    Therefore, most new gTLDs operators such as Frank Schilling will be successful, but if you are planning on running a full business, you should do it on a dot com.

    People need to stop comparing dot com and dot whatever…no need to compare…All we need to know is that the new gTLDs operators are going to be successful because there is a huge need for new domains for the newcomers and average Joes…

    So it’s a win win for everybody!!!

  13. dmpartners says

    July 17, 2012 at 11:46 pm

    Stupid and way to long

  14. professional domains says

    July 18, 2012 at 1:24 am

    i think the length just drives home the point. Many of these new domains are just too darn long.

  15. BullS says

    July 18, 2012 at 2:27 am

    do you prefer “BullS” sites or Sites “BullS”

    never mind- they are all totally “BullS”

  16. Grim says

    July 18, 2012 at 4:26 am

    MHB wrote:
    “On the other hand, as I have mentioned before a wise man once told me out of great confusion comes great opportunity.”

    ***

    I’ve seen you write this before, but I think it would work in only a small number of cases. (And at the moment, I can’t think of any.)

    KISS, or as most people know, KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID, has always worked out far better in my experience. People don’t usually like to be confused. That’s why so many of them hate math.

    “Keep everything as simple as possible, but not too simple.” -Albert Einstein

  17. dan says

    July 18, 2012 at 6:16 am

    Domain owned by Valerie Kirschenbaum (Global Renaissance Society, LLC)

  18. Bill says

    July 18, 2012 at 6:25 am

    Bloody brilliant!

  19. www.tl says

    July 18, 2012 at 6:36 am

    A well made video, that accurately confirms the fact that
    domain names, that you currently refer to as domain “hacks”,
    will become common-place in the next year or so.

    Does that mean that ‘hack’ prices will go down?

    No, quite the opposite!.. Hacks will become mainstream, and
    2+2 character hacks like “ba.by” will explode in value, as they
    will be seen to be much better than the gTLD option (that are
    unable to use a 2 character domain ending).

  20. Privy Domains says

    July 18, 2012 at 6:42 am

    wow……

    Eight minutes of fun and maybe knowledge…..

    This video truly explains what would happen after all these new TLD are launched.

    IMHO this will lead to more people coming towards .com & maybe to other older proven extensions.

  21. PARKS says

    July 18, 2012 at 8:54 am

    pretty obvious that this is bob parsons from godaddy..

  22. ri.sk says

    July 18, 2012 at 9:32 am

    @parks

    What makes you say that?

  23. jayjay says

    July 18, 2012 at 10:48 am

    funny.:P stuff.:) .lol ~!!

  24. Gene Downs says

    July 18, 2012 at 11:06 am

    It Just Keeps Getting BETTER !!!!

  25. Peter Dengate Thrush says

    July 18, 2012 at 12:02 pm

    Mildly funny at first, but underlying it is the patronizing message – consumers need to be protected from having to make choices, ‘cos they can’t cope with diversity.

    Thank goodness we don’t allow car manufacturers to come up with new names for their products every year, or just think how lost those poor purchasers would be. And lets go back to one domain registrar – we don’t need 900, confusing registrants with multiple competitive offerings.

    Inherently coupled with the protection idea is that there is someone better – wiser, with no self interest or bias- than the regulated market who should make these choices for us.

    I know which selection mechanism I prefer.

  26. duras says

    July 18, 2012 at 12:23 pm

    And the next step will be .xxx.com, .shoes.com etc …:)

  27. Adam says

    July 18, 2012 at 12:36 pm

    Interesting analogy Peter, there’s been between 200-300 car models in the US over the last decade. . . the numbers move around over the last decade but not above 300 or below 200 http://www.statista.com/statistics/200092/total-number-of-car-models-on-the-us-market-since-1990/
    Seems like consumers like choice but not an overwhelming amount of choices, when it comes to cars.
    I wonder why car manufacturers don’t let people choose whatever color they want ?

    Here’s an interesting article on choice in potato crisps.
    http://www.economist.com/node/17723028

    “As options multiply, there may be a point at which the effort required to obtain enough information to be able to distinguish sensibly between alternatives outweighs the benefit to the consumer of the extra choice. “At this point”, writes Barry Schwartz in “The Paradox of Choice”, “choice no longer liberates, but debilitates.”

    “Confusion, indecision, panic, regret, anxiety: choice seems to come at a price.”

    I’m all for letting the market decide. Good luck Peter.

  28. Peter Dengate Thrush says

    July 18, 2012 at 1:20 pm

    Thanks Adam,
    I don’t know what the quoted Car stats were actually counting as “models”, but I assume that by the time you multiply a “model” by say 10 colors to choose between, leather/not leather seating, plus 3 other options a consumer is actually faced with several tens of thousands of options.

    The Paradox of Choice point has been criticized;
    Here’s an extract from one critique, for those short of time.

    “Over the past ten years, a number of such experiments have been done by academics to evaluate the asserted paradox of choice for product categories ranging from mp3 players to mutual funds, and a paper was published in February (Scheibehenne et al) that conducted a meta-analysis of 50 of them. (h/t Tim Harford) Across all of these experiments, the average effect of increasing choice on consumption or satisfaction was “virtually zero”. Further, this meta-analysis showed a positive average effect of increasing choices for those experiments that, like the jam experiment, tested the effect of choice on consumption quantity rather than some measure of satisfaction as the outcome. That is, when it comes to sales, more choice is better.”

    The whole piece is here: http://theamericanscene.com/2010/04/28/the-non-paradox-of-choice

    And see also: http://www.scheibehenne.de/ScheibehenneGreifenederTodd2010.pdf

    And even if the point is correct – that one arrives at a point where the effort to discriminate does not yield better choices, that is not an argument for depriving people of the chance to offer those choices, or be exposed to them. Different consumers will have different thresholds. Consumer choice effort varies according to varying needs – at one point in my life I needed to know all about baby buggies. Later it was airline rewards programmes.

    There is also a simple non-threatening solution for consumers facing overload – they will lapse into buying from one/a few brands they feel comfortable with – as most of us do when choosing soap powder, beer and brands of coffee.

  29. LOL says

    July 18, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    Laughing my ass off. So true!

    Long live the .com!

    Whoever did this-gets it!

  30. Mort says

    July 19, 2012 at 9:15 am

    Very funny, but…a little too long.

  31. Paul says

    July 22, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    After reading Mike Mann’s arrogant comment on the social.org story, I retract my statement above. With guys like Mike Mann out there (who snap up primarily dot.com domains with absolutely no intention of developing them) perhaps we DO need alternatives to dot.com. Otherwise, these cybersquatters profit at everyone else’s expense. Again, I don’t think we need thousands of gTLD’s, but we certainly need more options vs. paying cybersquatters (aka domain speculators) a king’s ransom.

  32. Adam says

    July 22, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    Every business profits at someone’s expense

  33. Poker says

    July 22, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    Wrong, Adam.

    Most businesses enhance the buyer’s life or business in such a way that they have brought value to the buyer. Business that take more than they give don’t stay in business for very long.

  34. Irish.Me says

    July 22, 2012 at 6:28 pm

    Paul, not that Mike Mann doing the exact right thing. But!

    While cybersquatting is illegal act, investing in domain names is not.

    Catch him if you can.

    Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting

  35. Paul says

    July 24, 2012 at 1:35 am

    @ Irish.Me

    Thank you for that. I meant to write domain specualtor, not cybersquatter. Though I share an equal amount of contempt for domain speculators because they really add value to no one.

  36. Irish.Me says

    July 24, 2012 at 4:16 am

    @Paul: re “”” they really add value to no one “””

    It’s like saying oil speculators add no value at all.

    Speculation and arbitration is natural, like vermiform appendix, removing it is not a good idea as it will hinder the liquidity and may kill the market.

    Some successful domain name speculators certain.ly add some value to themselves and their families.

    Registrars and registries benefit as well, as they sell more.

    This in its turn pours bags full of cash into the industry and stimulates its growth and stability. That is also correlated with security etc.

    Well, as for everything else, someone needs to pay for it all and the cost is passed to the end-user. But that’s the prices.

    I cannot imagine the industry being structured differently. Anything else must be utopia.

  37. test says

    July 25, 2012 at 9:08 pm

    Islam.religion.peace
    Islam.peace.love


Recent Articles

  • Sedo now offering 6 more payment options
  • NameJet/SnapNames May 2022 domain sales led by Vip.org
  • Sedo weekly domain sales led by Yachts.com

Recent Comments

  • FX on Move over Web3 hype here comes Web5
  • steven on JoeRogan.net expires closes at $52,000 at GoDaddy auctions
  • Mark Thorpe on JoeRogan.net expires closes at $52,000 at GoDaddy auctions
  • brian on JoeRogan.net expires closes at $52,000 at GoDaddy auctions
  • Cheetah Cowboy on Sedo weekly domain name sales led by Marathon.de

Polls

How Many .Web Domains Will Be Registered 1 Year After Launch

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Archives

domain name news

Copyright ©2019 TheDomains.com — Published by Worldwide Media, Inc. — Site by Nuts and Bolts Media