• Welcome to DNForum.com - Domain Investor Forum, Free Domain Marketplace and a community for 45+ domain pros
    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 oldest global domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 45,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, using our free in-house built tools, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.

Amazingly poor traffic to the new extensions

Status
Not open for further replies.

David G

Internet Entrepreneur
The Originals
Legacy Exclusive Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2002
Messages
5,755
Reaction score
63
Continue to be amazed by the incredible lack of traffic going to new extensions - INFO's in particular. Only have a small number of info's but one of them is a fabulously good highly popular industry keyword & single word name. I paid about $1000 for it last yr from stocdoctor. It's a nicely done (small) developed website, online since last yr., with a number of both outbound & inbound links. Its been submitted to the major SE's many times, even with a suprisingly good Google Page Rank of 4. Incredibly it averages a mere 1 visitor a week, that is not a misprint, 1/week.

Sometimes I wonder if the SE's somehow penalize or rank lower the new extensions, info/biz in particular. It is interesting to note my nice dot-info site has a good GPR-4 but oddly seems impossible to find in Google when searching for that exact word? The really odd think is that I have lots of .US sites and they have good overall traffic, and seem to always rank well in the SE's, even if they have a lower GPR? Often when you search for the exact words my dot-us sites appear at or near the top of the search page, but this only seems to happen with dot-us for unknown reasons, no idea why.

It's quite surprising the market for .info's (.biz too) is so strong. Personally I doubt if I would ever buy another .info (or biz) for more than a reg fee, or even pay a small reg fee for the few remaining good names I see, which I rarely even think about registering when I stumble across them. Life is too short to wait many yrs into the future for them to ever be well recognized by the public and get anything more than token traffic, and basically zero type-ins.

I realize my views are very unpopular at the forums as so many here are info and biz resellers who are busy selling and sometimes flipping, mosty to other resellers and occasional small business end-users. Their main usage from what I can see is for a small businessman who can't get the com or org name at a reasonable price, so the info or biz is a good alternative to build up and market his website and still use an appropriate well targeted name. That is something similar to what I recall Duke also saying in the past. P.S. to Duke, please correct me if misquoted you.

My experience is (generally speaking) roughly 95% of type-in traffic goes to the com and (an educated guess) perhaps 5% to org. All other extensions are extremely poor, barely visible on the radar screen. With my developed sites an even higher percentage goes to org than average, but that is because I have a number of good keyword org & us sites, more than most have vs com.

Domainers should concentrate most all their money and time on com and org (and perhaps dot-us too), IMO. Comments from others are very welcome.
 
you might be right, but this will probably change in the future...I have invested in some .info names for the future as I think they will become the next .com...

however, for the time being you are probably correct
 
i have a 3 letter.biz that gets 1-5 uniques per day steady
i couldn't believe it..
no links, etc.
 
I only have one .info, and don't plan on buying anymore. Maybe I'll miss the boat, but who knows. A lot of people though "v" names would be popular now, but that obviously didn't happen, lol.
 
What .info name was it, real? Sometimes a check might indicate other symptoms causing very poor type-ins.
 
GT Web said:
I have invested in some .info names for the future as I think they will become the next .com...

Nothing will be the next dot com - if you think it will you are kidding yourself. However, the new extensions will develop into dot com's little brother - the good keyword names are worth investing in.
 
my exact opinions Ed.
 
My experience is (generally speaking) roughly 95% of type-in traffic goes to the com and (an educated guess) perhaps 5% to org.
I would say .net is more popular than .org but that is my own opinion
 
My experience roughly matches his. Most type-in traffic goes to .com domains, and some type-in traffic goes to .org domains, but hardly any goes to .net domains, and almost nothing goes to .biz and .info. While there are more .net domains registered than .org domains, I find that people are more likely to type in .org domains than .net domains in most cases.
 
RealNames said:
. It's a nicely done (small) developed website, online since last yr., with a number of both outbound & inbound links. Its been submitted to the major SE's many times, even with a suprisingly good Google Page Rank of 4. Incredibly it averages a mere 1 visitor a week, that is not a misprint, 1/week.

Sometimes I wonder if the SE's somehow penalize or rank lower the new extensions, info/biz in particular. .

Realnames it has nothing to do with the extension, it has everything to do with your "development" ..

I have developed in over 20 different extensions and can assure you that the SE's do not penalize your extension.

I have developed a number of .Info's that ranked very well and brought in plenty of traffic .. same with .Biz and even .BZ and .TV ..

hell my main extension is .Ws and I do quite well across the SE board.

I understand your frustration but placing well in the SE's has to do with your seo skills not your extension.


send me a PM .. let me see if I can see what the problem is
 
yeah... i think extension does not really affect.
it is the website development
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom