I have been under the weather this weekend so I have not been reading texts and emails right away as normal. A few people were mentioning to me the post we did a few days ago about new gtld sales.
The comments become the classic com fans vs non com fans.
Matt wrote one that challenged Rick Schwartz, Matt seemed to be questioning why if he had a 20 year plan for .com, why don’t new gtlds get afforded the same luxury?
This isn’t about new Gs declining. It’s about better understanding them. If you understand them, then there are opportunities to make $, or at least decide which gTLDs to stay away from and which to invest in.
As Monte and Frank have described, the new namespaces that will succeed are the ones that are attractive to end users by being safe with limited regulation, reasonably priced and those that build community around the name brand.
End users first must adopt before any chance of investors squeezing $ out of them, and that takes time. A market is being built…
DomainSnowflakes hypocrisy again: A 20 year plan for his .com investment but he’s been poopooing non-.coms since the major release 5 years ago!! Just be consistent Schwartz, that’s all we’re asking. Also be up front and honest about why you paid $200k for flowers.mobi (later selling for $6.5k, 96.5% loss) and how that affected your view of new Gs…
In my opinion Matt should have addressed Rick as Rick or Rick Schwartz and not DomainSnowflakes, because I don’t believe many in this business holds the opinion that Rick is a snowflake.
To the point of the question posed, should new gtlds get a 20 year plan? Feel free to leave your answer and reasons why or why not.