info nTLD Stats - Not looking good .

[jmcc]

Not al new tlds are loosers. Hold backs, outlandish prices for registration and renewals are holding acceptance back.

There's also the web usage/development issue.The percentage of developed sites in the new gTLDs is often much lower than that in the legacy gTLDs and the ccTLDs.

Why not pay 1 million for a single word .com as opposed to $50K every year for a single word.whatever? ICANN and registrars have rigged the market and are reaping the rewards.

That's the business. If the same regulations were applied to .COM/NET then both gTLDs would lose a lot of registrations.

Regards...jmcc

 

[accurate]

Not al new tlds are loosers.

The usage tells us otherwise.

Hold backs, outlandish prices for registration and renewals are holding acceptance back.

For sure.

Why not pay 1 million for a single word .com as opposed to $50K every year for a single word.whatever?

Hell no!

ICANN and registrars have rigged the market and are reaping the rewards.

Truth.

It was the lack of awareness that was the problem. What happened in the mid-2000s was that large-scale Domain Tasting created a very real shortage of good dropping domain names.

I need to read your book about this.

Some gTLDs had the entire day's drop tasted. That created a false demand. So rather than focusing on the gTLDs, people began to focus on their local ccTLDs which had been relatively ignored until then.

So this forced people to use ccTLDs since there were literally no good .com or .net domains available?

figures for tasting were quite horrific. Over 1,000,000,000 .COM domain names were registered and deleted over the Domain Tasting period.

That's crazy!

After 2009, it was mainly the registries, registrars and ICANN that were pushing the whole new gTLDs idea.There were some valid arguments for a few geo gTLDs. The public had largely moved on and the domain name industry had changed.

I guess it was too late as the ball was rolling.

The disconnect between the world of ICANN and that of reality was visible with ICANN's "projections" for the number of new gTLD domain names that it thought would be registered in the first year. It initially projected 15 million.

They are stuck at 25 - 26 million.

There's also the web usage/development issue.The percentage of developed sites in the new gTLDs is often much lower than that in the legacy gTLDs and the ccTLDs.

Yes, new domain extensions are not used much.

That's the business. If the same regulations were applied to .COM/NET then both gTLDs would lose a lot of registrations.

I'm sure Verisign would not that.

 

[mr-x]

The usage tells us otherwise.

This is how a healthy new top level domain looks​

.App is a shining example of a healthy and stable top level domain.

This is how a healthy new top level domain looks - Domain Name Wire | Domain Name News

.App is a shining example of a healthy and stable top level domain. One thing that has become clear since new top level domains came onto the scene nearly a decade ago is that you can’t judge a TLD by the number of registrations. Registries have played all sorts of games to make themselves look […]

domainnamewire.com

 

[jmcc]

The usage tells us otherwise.

Web usage and registrations are two very different things because the zone file counts are no longer a reliable metric due to heavy discounting. One of the worst examples was .LOAN. At its peak, it had about 2M registrations. It only had a few hundred developed websites.

So this forced people to use ccTLDs since there were literally no good .com or .net domains available?

Yep. All the good dropping domain names were being taken so people found that it was easier to get the domain name they wanted in their own ccTLD. Even if the ones in .COM/NET were on sale, why pay thousands of Dollars/Euros when the same domain name in the local ccTLD is available for regfee? That's the question that ICANN never asked itself.

That's crazy!

Hard to believe but it would have been worse only for Dell taking legal action against some of the bigger tasting registrars. There are glaciers that move quicker than ICANN.

I guess it was too late as the ball was rolling.

The first new gTLDs from the 2012 round started go live in late 2013 and early 2014. It was a completely different market almost five years after large-scale Domain Tasting had ended. Much of the demand that had been there five years previously was gone because the artificial shortage was gone.

They are stuck at 25 - 26 million.

The zone counts are around 23 million. That number is kept inflated by heavy discounting by the larger new gTLDs. Some of these zones can see over 70% of domain names from the same day's zone from the previous year completely replaced. That's around 70% of the domain names from a zone in 2020 not being present in the same zone/new gTLD for 2021.

Yes, new domain extensions are not used much.

The heavily discounted ones are the worst for web usage. But there are some new gTLDs that actually have relatively good web usage. The thing about web usage is that it is different from the zone file count. Some of the legacy gTLDs and ccTLDs can have web usage in the 30% to 40% range. It depends on the target market and the ecnomics of that market. A strong economy means that more people will be selling to each other online. That's why ccTLDs have higher web usage as most business is local. A gTLD is quite a different case as it is a composite of a lot of country level markets. With .COM, the main market is that of the US so it has strong web usage.

I'm sure Verisign would not that.

There's a lot of politics involved with contract negotiations. Gradual increases tend to be more common with larger gTLDs. The downside for these increases is that they have a worse effect on renewals in less well developed economies. This is the niche that .XYZ and .ONLINE have made their own. In those less well developed economies, the cost of a .XYZ is lower than that of a .COM. At a registrar level, many of these countries have no accredited ICANN registrars so all gTLD registration activity is outsourced to big players like Godaddy, Newfold Digital or Tucows.

Regards...jmcc

 

[jmcc]

This is how a healthy new top level domain looks​

.App is a shining example of a healthy and stable top level domain.

View attachment 5524

This is how a healthy new top level domain looks - Domain Name Wire | Domain Name News

.App is a shining example of a healthy and stable top level domain. One thing that has become clear since new top level domains came onto the scene nearly a decade ago is that you can’t judge a TLD by the number of registrations. Registries have played all sorts of games to make themselves look […]

domainnamewire.com

It is better than many of the new gTLDs and also slightly better than some in terms of web usage. The problem is that it is difficult to measure usage from a registrations graph as they are different things. It also has a very different market (a lot of US regs) than some of the other larger new gTLDs.

Regards...jmcc

 

[accurate]

This is how a healthy new top level domain looks​

.App is a shining example of a healthy and stable top level domain.

View attachment 5524

This is how a healthy new top level domain looks - Domain Name Wire | Domain Name News

.App is a shining example of a healthy and stable top level domain. One thing that has become clear since new top level domains came onto the scene nearly a decade ago is that you can’t judge a TLD by the number of registrations. Registries have played all sorts of games to make themselves look […]

domainnamewire.com

This is only one TLD.

 

[accurate]

Yep. All the good dropping domain names were being taken so people found that it was easier to get the domain name they wanted in their own ccTLD.

Makes sense.

Even if the ones in .COM/NET were on sale, why pay thousands of Dollars/Euros when the same domain name in the local ccTLD is available for regfee?

This probably still happens today.

That's the question that ICANN never asked itself.

ICANN never gets it right.

Hard to believe but it would have been worse only for Dell taking legal action against some of the bigger tasting registrars. There are glaciers that move quicker than ICANN.

They do move so slow.

The first new gTLDs from the 2012 round started go live in late 2013 and early 2014. It was a completely different market almost five years after large-scale Domain Tasting had ended. Much of the demand that had been there five years previously was gone because the artificial shortage was gone.

Did nobody understand this at ICANN?

The zone counts are around 23 million. That number is kept inflated by heavy discounting by the larger new gTLDs. Some of these zones can see over 70% of domain names from the same day's zone from the previous year completely replaced. That's around 70% of the domain names from a zone in 2020 not being present in the same zone/new gTLD for 2021.

So it's just crap and spam regs getting replaced?

But there are some new gTLDs that actually have relatively good web usage.

There are but I can only think of three; .CLUB, .APP, and .DESIGN.

Maybe .LIVE and .ART too?

This is the niche that .XYZ and .ONLINE have made their own. In those less well developed economies, the cost of a .XYZ is lower than that of a .COM.

Ohhh what's the renewal cost?

At a registrar level, many of these countries have no accredited ICANN registrars so all gTLD registration activity is outsourced to big players like Godaddy, Newfold Digital or Tucows.

You mean reseller agreements for .com, .bet, and .org?

 

[jmcc]

Makes sense.


This probably still happens today.

Probably has accelerated since then. A lot of people who register in ccTLDs don't seem to want to register in .COM so the domain name that they register only exists in the ccTLD and in no other TLDs. The more that a ccTLD takes over in its own country, the more common those unique domain names. This is why it is sometimes difficult to sell a .COM to the registrant of a ccTLD equivalent.

ICANN never gets it right.

Sometimes it does but in this case the whole multi-stakeholder model (registries, registrars, Intellectual Property, At Large, Civil Society) worked against it taking prompt action.

They do move so slow.

Did nobody understand this at ICANN?

Some did but there was a kind of irrational exuberance where a lot of people had bought into the idea of New gTLDs. The projections did not seem to be based on any knowledge of the domain name industry.

So it's just crap and spam regs getting replaced?

Some of it. There's a lot of advertising, highly speculative registrations and blackhat SEO registrations with scraped content.

There are but I can only think of three; .CLUB, .APP, and .DESIGN.

Maybe .LIVE and .ART too?

Some of the larger new gTLDs have evolved into two parallel TLDs (the genuine TLD and the heavily discounted registrations that don't renew). The problem with some of the smaller new gTLDs was that when they resorted to discounting, they swamped any natural development.

Ohhh what's the renewal cost?

Not sure of the renewal costs but they generally are more than the discounted regfee.

You mean reseller agreements for .com, .bet, and .org?

That's another problem. There are registrars who provide "registration as a service" to their resellers but the domain names are still registered via the registrar. ICANN technically only has a legal agreement with the registrar rather than the reseller. The reseller market, based on the monthly gTLD transactions report that I publish is about 24% of the gTLD market. There is talk in ICANN groups of the registry/registrar/reseller model but these things take years to resolve and the hard part is distinguishing registrars and resellers. A reseller may not be an ICANN accredited registrar but may have a substantial number of ccTLD domain names as a ccTLD registrar. Some of the larger registrar operator brands have hundreds of hosting brands and some of them are accredited ccTLD registrars. The big problem for ICANN is when a reseller disappears and the gTLD registrant goes looking for their domain name. They end up having to deal with the RAS registrar that had the agreement with the reseller.

Regards...jmcc

 

[mr-x]

This is only one TLD.

That was my point, not every ntld is a dog.

According to the article, Google is a good example who to roll out and manage a new tld.

 

[accurate]

That was my point, not every ntld is a dog.

According to the article, Google is a good example who to roll out and manage a new tld.

Not all companies have $25 million to roll on a big gamble. In addition have unlimited spending power to market a new TLD.

 

[accurate]

Probably has accelerated since then. A lot of people who register in ccTLDs don't seem to want to register in .COM so the domain name that they register only exists in the ccTLD and in no other TLDs. The more that a ccTLD takes over in its own country, the more common those unique domain names. This is why it is sometimes difficult to sell a .COM to the registrant of a ccTLD equivalent.

I've seen this many times. Often ccTLD owners don't care about .com. In fact they don't trust it.

The internet is great connecting people from around the world. Domain investors forget how local a lot of services are.

Some of it. There's a lot of advertising, highly speculative registrations and blackhat SEO registrations with scraped content.

Yes I've noticed that.

The reseller market, based on the monthly gTLD transactions report that I publish is about 24% of the gTLD market.

That is much larger than I thought. Makes sense if I think about all the web hosting companies out there.

Some of the larger registrar operator brands have hundreds of hosting brands and some of them are accredited ccTLD registrars.

I should launch a ccTLD registrar.

 

[mr-x]

Not all companies have $25 million to roll on a big gamble. In addition have unlimited spending power to market a new TLD.

So?

 

[accurate]

So you can't compare how .APP considering all the dinero Google has. @mr-x

 

[mr-x]

So you can't compare how .APP considering all the dinero Google has. @mr-x

It is a well managed tld.

 

[accurate]

It is a well managed tld.

I didn't see it wasn't. It's well managed because Google has a f*CK ton of money.

 

[mr-x]

I didn't see it wasn't. It's well managed because Google has a f*CK ton of money.

So? . The only point was, not all ntld are bombs.

 

[accurate]

So? . The only point was, not all ntld are bombs.

The majority are "pigeon sh*t" as Rick Schwartz would say.

 

[mr-x]

The majority are "pigeon sh*t" as Rick Schwartz would say.

That was the point right. Most ntld only made .com's more valuable. BUT a few are well run or have become popular for whatever reason.