

Why .com will probably get Netflixed by New TLDs - alexkehr
http://www.alexkehr.com/2015/04/why-com-will-probably-get-netflixed-by-new-tlds/

======
jandrewrogers
The big change since the original days of the dotcom boom is that most people
no longer find websites for the first time by typing
"[http://www.$FOO.com"](http://www.$FOO.com") in the address bar of their
browser. It is an increasingly marginal means by which valuable new traffic is
driven to domains. It goes beyond just web search; a large percentage of
people "find" sites by clicking on links they see in their social media or
their browsers automagically remembering the actual domain for them based on a
few letters of the associated brand name. The app-ification of the Internet is
also devaluing domain names as a branding vehicle.

This is analogous to why no one remembers phone numbers (or email addresses)
anymore. Our phones and computers abstract that away for us so that we only
need to know _who_ we want to call. This has a lot of economy in every day
usage.

~~~
Throwaway90283
I believe it's still .com, then everything else, even if people typically find
sites through search.

Why? If I write on a poster john.com, or on a cereal box, or on my business
card, or I say 'visit us at john.com' on the radio, or my tv commercial says
john.com at the end, people know exactly what to do. They recognize the words
john.com as a website they can visit or search.

Now, if I say, 'visit us at john.ninja' on the radio, people have no idea what
I'm even referring towards. If it's on my business card, people are wondering
if my last name is ninja, or maybe this is just a fun play on words, and I
refer to myself as john.ninja and the dot in-between the words is for design
purposes. To fix that, you need to write more, www.john.ninja. However, it's
still difficult for people to digest. Most people would probably ask, 'that's
a website?', and then they would just visit google and type in 'john ninja',
which may or may not get them to my site.

~~~
icebraining
If you put [http://john.ninja](http://john.ninja), I'd bet most people would
figure it out.

As a side note, that's a real address :)

~~~
Retr0spectrum
Since most modern browsers hide the [http://](http://), I'm sure a lot of
people would still have no idea.

~~~
lucasmullens
Only recently. Most people have seen [http://](http://) for years.

------
chjohasbrouck
The problem with this whole argument is that the person purchasing the domain
isn't the consumer.

The end user is the consumer, and the .COM TLD isn't failing them in any
perceptible way whatsoever. The higher prices actually __serve __their needs,
because they lend greater credibility to the .COMs. The consumer can trust
them more, the consumer can expect greater investment in the product they
serve, and the consumer can easily recognize and remember the domain name.

~~~
alexkehr
There is something insanely useful about New TLDs though that also lends
credibility to a site. For example, I have the domain alex.social as sort of a
social hub for myself. I believe that that makes my site almost more credible
than my blog domain, alexkehr.com. A domain that firmly says who you are and
what you do seems like it should/does have a lot of value.

~~~
morgante
If you tell the average consumer your site is at "alex.social" they will type
in alex.social.com.

~~~
icebraining
It's funny, but our main site now uses a .solutions domain, and our existing
users adapted pretty well, even those who have trouble with basic computer
tasks.

------
hatsix
In what way is .com expensive compared to the new tlds? It isn't verisign,
it's the squatters who are demanding outrageous prices... Unless the new TLDs
have specific content requirements, (like .sucks has... though their pricing
is the topic for a separate thread)

The squatters have already moved on to the new tlds. I recently looked up my
first name, and while every tld I could find is registered, there isn't
content up on any of them, it's all "this domain is for sale". I contacted one
to see what price they're asking... negotiated them down to $3000. They're
playing the long game.

And this is the 'innovation'?

~~~
seanp2k2
Re: squatters...how many websites do you (reader) use when looking for X where
X is even in the domain? For hosting, I use digitalocean, not hosting.com. For
shopping, I use Amazon or overstock or some named store, not name-of-thing.com

When I'm searching for reviews of something and get results for "exact-thing-
I-searched-reviews.com" or "best-name-of-thing.com", I immediately know those
are spam and not worth visiting, since no business / forum / self-respecting
personal site would call themselves something so ridiculously specific.

TL;DR generic name domains are useless since no established reputable
companies use them. Look at the top Alexa 500 and consider how many related to
X even have X in the domain name.

------
ohazi
There might be some points here about the economics of namesquatting, but it's
a mistake to talk about any sort of "disruptive innovation" happening here.
There's nothing innovative about the new TLDs... they're just names.

The biggest problem I see with the new gTLDs is the fact that I know very
little about the the companies that own them. Did they set up shop to try and
sell flashy new names to suckers who don't know any better, or are they trying
to build a long-term, sustainable domain business? Should I be wary of the
ones that charge more, or the ones that charge less (balancing opportunistic
price gouging vs making sure the business earns enough to continue to operate
long-term)?

Until I have good answers to these questions, I'm avoiding gTLDs. Public
acceptance of gTLDs will come eventually if it needs to, but the dearth of
sleazy, extortionate gTLD companies suggests to me that ICANN has not set
these up to succeed.

------
tres
I can't see the Blockbuster analogy fully working here. It seems that a big
reason why the old video rental model died was simply convenience. .com is the
more convenient choice due to inertia.

It seems to me that a better analogy is that the new TLDs seem more like
suburbs to a city. .com still lies at the city core, but the suburbs provide
for a new type of Internet resident -- those who are willing to trade
convenience and location for price and value.

Like Detroit, or the rust-belt in the 80's it's possible that the core becomes
rotten, but it seems in those cases, the nexus still remains, but becomes
depreciated. It will be interesting to see how domain real-estate follows the
patterns exhibited in real-estate as the new TLDs become more ubiquitous; will
there eventually be a revival of .com similar to the urban revivals we've
seen? Or maybe that's just stretching the analogy a bit too far :)

------
jayzalowitz
I bought c.how recently... there are now 4 letter domains that make words that
you can just register. shit is awesome.

------
happytrails
Really though? .com is ubiquitous in culture so I doubt any of this will come
to fruition.

~~~
spiritplumber
Domain names are mattering somewhat less lately - it just has to show up high
on google/bing, and be short and recognizable.

I still like mine though.

~~~
0x0
As long as they are used in email adresses, they're still pretty significant.

------
Zaephyr
I think it is hard to say how this will play out. Maybe the author is right
and people will care less about their domain name, or it could be become one
of several presence items that companies use to reach customers.

For instance, the US toll-free numbers continue to increase (now 6 exchanges)
despite the decline of metered toll service and payphones.

------
jonawesomegreen
Has anyone found that the registrars for the new TLDs seem very shady? I was
trying to register a domain with a new TLD and I could not find a single
registrar for this particular TLD that I trusted with my credit card. Some of
them had barely working websites with broken links and bad info.

~~~
noblethrasher
Hover has a ton of TLDs.

~~~
seanp2k2
So does name.com, iwantmyname, namecheap, etc. Just visit your favorite
registrar in most cases.

------
stonogo
Is the author trying to make "netflix" a verb with the same meaning as
"obviate"?

------
return0
the only good about the arbitrary tlds is that icann has now run out of shitty
ideas

------
Zalos
It´s password protected, why is that? anybody got the password? I would like
to read the article.

~~~
seba_dos1
[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.alexkehr.com%2F2015%2F04%2Fwhy-
com-will-probably-get-netflixed-by-new-
tlds%2F&oq=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.alexkehr.com%2F2015%2F04%2Fwhy-com-will-
probably-get-netflixed-by-new-
tlds%2F&ie=UTF-8&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i58.2089j0j7&sourceid=chrome-
instant&ion=1&es_th=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.&bvm=bv.90491159,d.bGg&biw=1920&bih=995&dpr=1&ech=1&psi=nZsrVcunMomMsAGH3IGwDA.1428921246963.3&ei=nZsrVcunMomMsAGH3IGwDA&emsg=NCSR&noj=1)

~~~
Zalos
Thank you :)

------
beberlei
Happened to us. Found a great name for our bootstrapped product. The .com-
domain was already snatched from a re-seller. They wanted 28.000 USD for it.
So we went with .io like so many other tech products before.

~~~
seanp2k2
IMO .io is a little different, since it has quite a bit of momentum now and
broadly speaking, stuff at .io domains is for the tech-savvy who are likely
aware that there are things aside from .com out there.

If a layperson heard "visit us on the web at foo.io !" On the radio / TV, I
think many would either search "foo.io" or "foo", or try foo.io.com , then get
frustrated that it wasn't what they expected.

------
smutticus
There are all kinds of predictions flying around on how the introduction of
new gTLDs is going to effect the economics of older TLDs. No one knows what's
going to happen.

