If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the largest domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 105,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.Register Today on DNForum IT'S FREE!
People often just following Google around and as soon as something efects search, everyone jumps on it, whatever it may be, then agencies follow, expanding Google reach very quickly..
Currently, I think there is very litttle boost if any.. Maybe more long ago, but I haven't seen anything significant with it as of late.
People go to google because they find what they're looking for: excellent search results.
That's google's business. Most major companies and websites have their sites built on .com domains, so those are likely the most "relevant" sites. If google all of a sudden starts ranking other extensions higher rather than ranking primarily by relevance, people are going to use other search engines to find what they're looking for. Remember, this is why we switched from yahoo to google. Nothing is stopping us from switching back if yahoo or bing would return more relevant searches. Google understands what their business is, and won't make any risky decisions like this. They may promote other extensions to combat cybersquatting and give other options, but unless the major entities move away from .coms, they will remain KING. Google will likely tweak their algorithm, but a company that's built on good search results will likely not make any major changes.
I actually see new extensions helping out the .coms b/c it can bring new investors into this field. The majority of people still don't understand much about domains, extensions, websites, etc. Massive marketing for the new gilds can change that- I wouldn't be surprised seeing new heights for .com sales. Imagine 5 times the amount of investors, 10 times, etc. This can exponentially drive up the prices of domain sales in the most valuable, most in-demand extension. You won't see me selling my .coms any time soon.
Last edited by nydomain; 07-06-2012 at 07:16 AM.
So yes...Google is stupid enough, foolish enough, and savvy enough to attempt this - ranking google paid domains and sites higher.
Highly doubtful they would. It opens themselves up to SEO manipulation and lawsuits.
I can't think there's much to be 'scared' about, with the
gTLD's. There's an old English word, "folly", that seems to
be appropriate here, and the word describes something
that has no particular use yet has had plenty of money
lavished on it.
That said, I think there will be some innovations in the
gTLD space but I don't think that business plans have
been thought out very well...
Ultimately, the gTLD's will need to appeal to SME's and
individuals, and none of the gTLD's i've seen so far take
their needs and desires in to account.
The greatest impact the gTLD's will have on domains is
on two-word .com values, where admittedly, gTLD's
are a worthy challenger...
The message they try and give and what actually happens are two very different things.
They haven't openly said G+1 will give you higher rankings. If it's beneficial from a SEO point of view it's negligible at best.
Google is using their enormous traffic base to get users signed up to Google Plus and other G properties.
They want people using more of their products/services.
Any company with this amount of influence would do the same thing.
That in itself doesn't make them shady/evil or whatever you want to call it.
For the uninformed, Google's search engine (with its famous PageRank algorithm based on backlinks) was NOT made to be a business in the first place.
Profoundly influenced by #Bauhaus, @Nameslave unrepentantly embraces #Minimalism in his #multimedia portfolio. His early works include an experimental adaptation of Chekhov’s Cherry Orchard inspired at least partly by Robert Fripp. His totally irrelevant M.Ed. dissertation examines Organizational Culture and Change Management.
It's funny how the sky seems to be falling with these new gtld's but many were saying this was what made .com more valuable in the first place.
Nothing to worry about. Free usually attracts spammers and crap, see Blogspot.
"Most people like 'free' on the interest, and are used to getting an email account and social media account for free, why not a domain name that you can build your own website or webpage on?"
Control. I wouldn't put time into something that can be gone when you wake up the next morning. A lot of people over the years thought Google was their foundation. Maybe they had great SERPS, then an update and poof. Maybe somebody was making good money with PPC, then they got Slapped, gone.
It might be a first year free situation, then pay afterwards. It's how they have this setup - http://www.gybo.com/florida/howitworks
Google partnered with Intuit (Homestead) for free website, Hosting, domain. For the first year.
I think anything you can do to become less dependent on Google is a good thing.
truth be told, those who reg and park top brand typos should be worried. They will see their earning decrease significantly in time, in a short time if the cash rich brands start to heavily promote.
All those typos dot com will be worthless when companies like Pepsi start promoting their own brand with their brand name as the URL. With the amount of advertising companies like this pump into media, a solid media blitz will promote the new TLD as the Pepsi defacto internet address.
As for being worried as a whole...no, no worries. Because many of these vanity TLD's DO NOT have the cash and reserves to literally embed their brand into the consciousness of the consumer. In order to be truly successful in that regard, there needs to be a sustained ad campaign on all media outlets in order to sell the brand as the name, the name as the brand.
Because of the piles of cash needed for such purposes, many new TLD's will fall terribly behind and will fail. For instance, a group like .eco or .green are loosely organized and do not have the advantage of huge cash reserves to promote. The users will be those that happen to "find" the TLD. Even though Social Media will help in getting the word out, the general public and consumer are not going to actively look for these new TLD's. We know about them and follow them from the point of view that we know about and follow domain name news.
Without that initial sustained media blitz, many of the new TLD's will not enjoy widespread adoption and usage. Plus, those that are brands will be closely held and not available to reg and purchase to the general public.
"All those typos dot com will be worthless when companies like Pepsi start promoting their own brand with their brand name as the URL. With the amount of advertising companies like this pump into media, a solid media blitz will promote the new TLD as the Pepsi defacto internet address."
They wouldn't do something like that. They already have their .com. Not one company is going to change from theircompany.com to something.theirbrand.
For what? You actually think a company would do that? If so, can you list even 1 benefit?
dell.com to...... shop.dell, store.dell? Longer url, would have to change all the products they have their url on, confusion with customers, change their marketing in which they've already spent millions on, all kinds of problems. No point to it. The major brands already have their .coms. It works. The new extensions are just for domain speculators and new business (not smart ones). The companies that are getting their .brands aren't doing it so they can give up their .com. Again, no reason too.