Dvd.net

**woeger** · 10-29-2002, 10:05 PM

Please forgive this post. It was posted as a new thread by accident. Will re-post correctly as a reply to the videos.org thread.

**alldig** · 10-29-2002, 10:06 PM

$2000 was a fair price for you to sell at...I would now appraise the domain at $1000-4000 resale.

**Kid Kool** · 10-29-2002, 10:33 PM

i would say anywhere from 3-15k to an end user. given the success of auctions on such hard to use names names as "suck.net" I would value this highly. even on a crappy ebay auction this name would go 5k easily

**GiantDomains** · 10-29-2002, 10:36 PM

nice.

Has anyone noticed .net gaining some strength...

Seems they are a some-what hot commodity, maybe since .biz was so highly anticipated as a .com crowding solution - yet has lost much steam. .net seems to have sustained its position as 2nd best.

**woeger** · 10-29-2002, 10:51 PM

Yes, and .ORG seems to have withered on the vine (pricewise). Especially with the Internet Society's non-profit taking over the .ORG registry on January 1, 2003. I have read their information and they seem to want to take it back from a gTLD to a non-profit only TLD. At least they want to encourage new registrations from non-profits which will likely hurt the value of existing .ORG name holders. They are even going to advertise .ORG I believe, but say it for non-profits. Also you must be a non-profit to use the accredited .ORG domain logo or be in the registry's directory of .ORG web sites... (sigh)

**Bob** · 10-29-2002, 10:58 PM

Originally posted by doberry
nice.

Has anyone noticed .net gaining some strength...

Seems they are a some-what hot commodity, maybe since .biz was so highly anticipated as a .com crowding solution - yet has lost much steam. .net seems to have sustained its position as 2nd best.

I have anticipated this for 2 years now, and YES, .NET is gaining.

.com you cannot get a good name without spending a fortune. .ORG will alwaya have hte stigma of a non-profit. .NET is the next logical choice. It is what I have tried to convey for the last 18 months. We will see though.

-Bob

**Bob** · 10-29-2002, 11:00 PM

Originally posted by woeger
Yes, and .ORG seems to have withered on the vine (pricewise). Especially with the Internet Society's non-profit taking over the .ORG registry on January 1, 2003. I have read their information and they seem to want to take it back from a gTLD to a non-profit only TLD. At least they want to encourage new registrations from non-profits which will likely hurt the value of existing .ORG name holders. They are even going to advertise .ORG I believe, but say it for non-profits. Also you must be a non-profit to use the accredited .ORG domain logo or be in the registry's directory of .ORG web sites... (sigh)

I have seen strengthening in .ORG prices over the last 6-8 months, so I am not sure I agree with .ORG withering pricewise.

The new ISOC will NOT restrict the use of .ORG names (or that is at least what I read in several places).

-Bob

**GiantDomains** · 10-29-2002, 11:01 PM

Bob - agree on the dot-org too.

Seeing a lot of dot-orgs once worthless, selling for nickels instead of pennies. Thats a good sign.

**Bob** · 10-29-2002, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by doberry
Bob - agree on the dot-org too.

Seeing a lot of dot-orgs once wortless, selling for nickels instead of pennies. Thats a good sign.

I have been receiving a lot of email for one-word .orgs. People seem to be paying a strong $350 - $500 for them too,without hesitating. Maybe I should start raising my prices?

-Bob

**woeger** · 10-29-2002, 11:17 PM

Well maybe .ORG sales have firmed up a bit Bob, and I'm glad to hear that for you and others sake.

I believe it will always have a non-profit stigma associated with it, as the new registry seems to going to be really pushing .ORG as the solution to non-profits. This would (as I see it) de-value .ORG domains in general. Very few businesses in my opinion would want a domain that denoted to the public that they weren't in business to make money (i.e. NO-profit).

I have dumped almost all of my .ORGs in preference to .NET and .COM. I thought it was a wise thing to do before the new registry took over. At least NSI was rather inept in running and marketing .ORG. The new team might really push hard to associate .ORGs with non-profits.

Also, I was reading their ICANN agreement and proposal to run .ORG and what they plan in every case screams "we want non-profits only". Not once in all their proposals and ICANN operating agreement did I see any mention that they considered .ORG a gTLD open to anyone. On the contrary their documents seem to stress that they are geared toward issuing domains for non-profit organizations. The new .ORG registry in their application to ICANN lists loads on new "value added" services and features they will be offering, and every one seems to be tailored only to the non-profit market.

I just don't like the handwriting on the wall... so I chose to get out of my .ORGs before they (the new registry) came into power.

**GiantDomains** · 10-29-2002, 11:20 PM

I would prefer it to be associated with non-profit organizations...that was its intent...it will only strenthen .net and .com as commercial extensions....

**Bob** · 10-29-2002, 11:23 PM

I think the stigma will always be there too, but as we all know as speculators, there is no real restriction. . . Wish I had a crystal ball to see what was going to happen.

-Bob

**woeger** · 10-29-2002, 11:23 PM

But then doberry, if you take that line of reasoning with .ORG (to revert it back to non-profits only), remember that .NET was originally reserved only for Internet Providers and Network Infrastructure. That registry contract is up in 2 years or so I believe, so they could perceivably revert that back to its original use also. Is that what you really want?

**Bob** · 10-29-2002, 11:26 PM

Originally posted by woeger
But then doberry, if you take that line of reasoning with .ORG (to revert it back to non-profits only), remember that .NET was originally reserved only for Internet Providers and Network Infrastructure. That registry contract is up in 2 years or so I believe, so they could perceivably revert that back to its original use also. Is that what you really want?

The original intent of .NET is not nearly as strong as the original intent of .ORG.

Plus, with micro$oft pushing their .NET strategy, I think that will be healthy for .NET domain names. Software developers will naturally gravitate to .NET names to create the association with .NET strategy. . .

-Bob

**woeger** · 10-29-2002, 11:30 PM

Bob, I agree with you about .NET - Can you believe Microsoft is trying to Trademark the word "NET" for all computer related uses. Do they really think they invented the word for use with computers and deserve sole rights to use "NET"?

**GiantDomains** · 10-29-2002, 11:33 PM

Originally posted by woeger
But then doberry, if you take that line of reasoning with .ORG (to revert it back to non-profits only), remember that .NET was originally reserved only for Internet Providers and Network Infrastructure. That registry contract is up in 2 years or so I believe, so they could perceivably revert that back to its original use also. Is that what you really want?

That'd be great....

all extensions for their intended purposes...

**Bob** · 10-29-2002, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by woeger
Bob, I agree with you about .NET - Can you believe Microsoft is trying to Trademark the word "NET" for all computer related uses. Do they really think they invented the word for use with computers and deserve sole rights to use "NET"?

Part of micro$oft's ploy to try to take over the world.

They will not succeed.

-Bob