Anyone getting scared of New gtld's yet?

[hugegrowth]

After Frank Schilling's blog post about what some of the big tech companies like Google might do with gtld's, I'm wondering if there is more reason to worry about them.

Say Google will give you one or more free domains (just like a free email account), and with that domain you can build a website, use it for email, etc., wouldn't that have a negative effect on existing extensions?

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?

Companies like Google have the reach to make millions of people aware of gtlds, and use a service with a free gtld like .web for example.

Ofcourse, bigger serious companies will prefer a .com, but for personal and small business sites, a free .web, .shop, or .app domain may be just fine if used through a reputable company like Google.

If they do give some of these gtlds away for free, the best ones could also get 'hoarded' by speculators, and soon you would only have mediocre choices available to register on a new gtld.

Also, .info domains are practically free and you don't see a huge uptake of them for websites.

Hard to say how it will shake out, but I see the potential for the new gtld's to be more of a concern if they are given away for free by big companies who will promote them, and offer free web services with them.

[katherine]

Yes, people use free E-mail (gmail), or free Hosting services like blogging under a subdomain (blogger.com).

But when you want to be in control, you just buy your own domain.

The gTLDs are regulated. So you know that verisign will be allowed to increase their fees by 7% almost every year. But that's it.
Private TLDs are not subject to those regulations. In fact they could even take them away from you. You are at the mercy of the registry/provider because you don't hold title over the domain.
And any free service is bound to come to an end at some point.
(Reminds me of another.com when they put an abrupt end to their free vanity E-mail service)

A TLD needs development in order to gain recognition and thrive. Giving them for free, even handing them out like candy is not going to foster the development needed.

The problem with free domains like the .co.cc or .tk is that they are geared at non-professional use. Since they are free you get a lot of junk and little notable development. Also, individuals do not have the resources of corporations so they are not going to 'enhance' the namespace with their low key websites. It's normal, people are more careful and respectful with the things they paid for, than those they got for free...

Free sounds like a smart idea, but isn't. Even cheap prices can hurt: look at .info.

I think there is too much noise about new extensions, the real potential lies in the ccTLDs.

[hugegrowth]

Good points, but if companies like Google promote their Gtlds for free, millions of people will be seeing them everyday...

That's the part that's different with how .info and others have been handled.

[Gerry]

in terms of the Google .tld, smart on their side of things. It just creates a stonger stranglehold on the internet if google has everyone (or nearly everyone) signing up for their services. However, I can not see google allowing or releasing any domain names at all. It will most likely be in the form of yoursite.google.com

[Mark Talbot]

Google free domains will be just be googlified geocities pages and sites, imo..

And yes lots of people will use them, including companies that use facebook for their homepage,... but real companies that want full control will not, except for maybe a redirect or an intro page.

[ksinclair]

Google is afraid of FB and will give free subdomains to try and lure people off of FB. Google is so big they will get some takers but I dont see that it matters to domainers. Individuals with low traffic domains are not relevent. Ignore it.

So many TLDs mean more confusion than ever for people - so once again, .com will be king as it is the tool that brings a focus to traffic.

[TheLegendaryJP]

This is the concern?

I must be focusing on a bigger issue, why would domains people type in to find doors, cars, sex or food etc be affected by someone getting a free .crap extension to use, how does that negate all the other needs of life and the web?

[ImageAuthors]

Personally, I'm not sure what to expect from Google, how that might affect the domain market, or how to react; and I don't pretend to have any special insights. Even Frank Schilling's blog post was conjecture and speculation.

Do we really know that Google will be giving away domains like candy? Perhaps they will. They already give away Hosting through Blogger, and that service is underutilized by the public. The blogspot.com subdomain name space is nowhere near as saturated as the name space for most of the existing gTLDs.

How would Google distribute these free domains, assuming this happens? I can envision .web eventually having the same cachet as .net. But how many new extensions are as generic as .web? Few if any. So there would still be multiple people competing for the premium .web domains -- including some already established businesses built on the corresponding .com, .net, or .org. Would these freebies simply be handed out on a first come / first served basis like email addresses and twitter handles? Google would anger some major companies if their branding interests were not given priority. But let's assume Google ignores the interests of the people who pay for their ads. Let's assume 10 people were interested in one particular .com domain that is also registered by a domainer in .net and .org. Perhaps one of these people will get a free .web domain. That leaves 9 people as potential buyers of the more established gTLDs. Similarly, if there were originally 100 people interested in the .com/.net/.org, then there will still be 99. Meanwhile, if there was only 1 person interested in the .com/.net/.org version of a name, there is a possibility that this person will opt for a free .web. But if this person cares about brand protection, then the .com/.net/.org will still be important to acquire.

With new extensions available (free or not), the supply is increased while the demand remains constant. That will naturally tend to reduce realized prices in certain areas -- probably for domain names where there is little startup capital and only few interested buyers. Premium domains that attract large numbers of offers at higher amounts should retain their value. But not all the new extensions will succeed, and many have limited use -- .art, for example. I would only expect a few of the new extensions to be credible and useful for most buyers. Even if all the new gTLDs were marketed brilliantly and they all -- each and every one of them -- gained public traction, unlike their predecessors .pro and .travel ... even then, most of the extensions are specific to particular niches and would not be viable alternatives to .com/.net/.org for the majority of domains.

Other than .web, what extensions are plausible enough to succeed? That is not a rhetorical question.

[dcristo]

Also, .info domains are practically free and you don't see a huge uptake of them for websites.

Not after the first year they're not.

[ImageAuthors]

P.S. Personally I hope that Google DOES saturate the internet with their own extensions and promotes them to the extent of distorting page rank to give .web (and other Google-operated gTLDs) a competitive advantage. Because if Google pursues its interests in so obvious a manner, I believe there will be a public backlash against an already too powerful company -- perhaps even a federal antitrust breakup.

[Poker]

Investing always requires climbing a "wall of worry". Climb more (as long as it's working) & worry less.

[Gerry]

Not sure why all the talk about .google. That is only one of 1900 applications.

As for the others, the name is the brand - the brand is the name.

Privately held firms and labels will remain private.

Do you think Pepsi is going to start selling .pepsi names? Not a chance. It is a matter of building up the trust factor (in the future) and the brand loyalty when someone want to go to the Pepsi site.

[Gerry]

Google is afraid of FB and will give free subdomains to try and lure people off of FB.

I was listening to a report yesterday on the failures of bing.

The reason I mention this is FB is NOT a search engine. Thus, there is not standard "facebook it" mantra when someone wants to look something up. "Google it" is now classified as a verb in the english language and the point of the interview was...with all the billions in cash that MS has thrown at bing to make it increase in market share, bing has failed to capture less than 25% of the search engine market - and likely will not. This was a big catalyst in MS writing off 9 billion dollars in quarterly loses.

Google is not afraid of FB. Google controls over 65% of the ad revenue generated on the internet. That translates into a massive cash cow called Google.

Oh...and look for MS to unload Bing in the near future.

[afloat.com]

This is the concern?

I must be focusing on a bigger issue, why would domains people type in to find doors, cars, sex or food etc be affected by someone getting a free .crap extension to use, how does that negate all the other needs of life and the web?

Most people won't be searching for cars at cars.com or doors at doors.com, they will do what most internet savvy people do and use a search engine or apps, wherin the domain becomes less relevant anyway.

The only real long term future I see for domains is in the prestige and authority of a company having a nice domain to brand itself on.

[jasdon11]

A free domain is only competition for free-to-reg domains, not secondary market domains.

[TheLegendaryJP]

Youre right, everyone should sell off their premium generics while there is still time.

Most people won't be searching for cars at cars.com or doors at doors.com, they will do what most internet savvy people do and use a search engine or apps, wherin the domain becomes less relevant anyway.

The only real long term future I see for domains is in the prestige and authority of a company having a nice domain to brand itself on.

[Vincent]

Most people won't be searching for cars at cars.com or doors at doors.com, they will do what most internet savvy people do and use a search engine or apps, wherin the domain becomes less relevant anyway.

The only real long term future I see for domains is in the prestige and authority of a company having a nice domain to brand itself on.

Would this be a big concern for violating anti-trust law? What if Google can emphasize its extension and gets away with it? You go to google and search "Car" then, you would see: car.web or car.google cars.google, mitsubish.car.google. LOL

[clasione]

If word got out that www.website.google ranked better in Google.com everyone would jump right on the bandwagon. They've got a lot of leverage, that's for sure.

[Mark Talbot]

Personally, I'm not sure what to expect from Google, how that might affect the domain market, or how to react; and I don't pretend to have any special insights. Even Frank Schilling's blog post was conjecture and speculation.

Really like your post IA. Obviously someone that thinks.

But dont diminish what is underlined as obvious. It is important at this point.

edit to add: what to do during a sunami....... think about it. Save your loved ones lives for the obvious result.

[dcristo]

If word got out that www.website.google ranked better in Google.com everyone would jump right on the bandwagon. They've got a lot of leverage, that's for sure.

I don't think google would be stupid enough to do this.