Now that all of the players who applied for multiple new gTLD strings are know and the strings they applied for are on the table I figured you might want to chime in on who you thought had the best set of new gTLD strings, pound for pound, dollar for dollar (brands not included)
What I mean by pound for pound is that of the company’s that made application for 10 or more strings who did you think do the best job of putting together the best list for the amount they spent.
Its hard to compare someone who applied for 26 Strings like Demand Media or 31 in the case of Directi to Donuts which applied for 307 but considering the $185K per string application fee who did you think came up with the best list?
Here are you choices and links to the articles where the list of the strings are revealed
You can make your picks on our poll on the right and place any comments below
Donuts, Inc. (307)
Minds + Machines (Top Level Domain Holdings) (68)
Amazon.com (77)
Famous Four Media (61)
Frank Schilling (Uniregistry) (54)
Directi (Radix) (31)
Demand Media (26)
STRAAT Investments (Juan Calle) (13)
Daniel Negari (11)
Michael –
Why dont you run a poll where you ask the question:
If all proposed strings were available today how many domains would you potentially purchase?
I think if they can win a few after string contention, Directi could be in a great position.
However it is going to be difficult for them to stamp their authority on quite a few of the strings, where they are up against some industry giants in the form of Amazon and Google.
I’m really interested to see how the ‘little guy’ gets on against these behemoths in arbitration discussions.
Donuts are in a crazy strong position with the amount of applications, the people involved and the resources available. For me they will definitely be the surprise winners of this first round of TLDs, irrelevant of whether I think that have got the best ‘pound for pound’ application portfolio.
Personally I find it hard to judge what is “good” because I don’t really think (for me at least) these the domains that will be for sale from all this will be so much for domainers/investing.
I can only comment on what just doesn’t make “enough” sense to me to Merritt a whole naming space, like .vodka. I just don’t get it. Was that just applied for because vodka.com sold for a lot of $? How many .vodkas could possibly e registered. Will hot girls give out codes to redeem a free .vodka domain in night clubs? Then what do you do with it?
Back
Good idea
Will do it next
They all suck because new gTLDs suck!
🙂
But seriously even though they suck, I can wait suckers to buy domains in new gTLDS and develop sites on them.
Free Traffic for my dot-COMs.
@ MHB
Add another option:
None of them
or
they all suck 🙂
Your poll is basically forcing people to admit that new gTLDs are great 🙂
The best ones are the ones that will leak traffic to my existing .com domains.
Google has the best chances to make money with the new TLDs
and .shop will be one of the best new TLDs
Another good poll might be dollar for dollar invested – who will get the best return percentage
“Now that all of the players who applied for multiple new gTLD strings are know”
Now that ???all??? of the PLAYERS who applied for multiple new gTLD strings are KNOWN
The “strings” do not matter. The PLAYERS matter. The game will be changed along with the “strings” now that the PLAYERS have been vetted.
The PLAYERS will also be changing. The ICANN meeting will be musical chairs.
There are 1000 times more PLAYERS outside of the ICANN Star.Chamber.
They are not going to waste any more time. They are ready to sell to the market.
If you study the ICANN “Script” with the new CEO and the months of idle nothingness, the players will give up and ask for 100% refunds. While that is going on the U.S. will be holding an election. The current NTIA IANA stonewalling and lip-service in Washington DC may change.
The “Script” handles all possible outcomes. There are many moving parts that are in the process of being changed. ICANN and their players are isolated and harmless, along with the GAC.
I think Directi has the overall best submission in terms of reasonable number of extensions and hitting the right markets.
Hello Michael,
With all due respect:
All of this will mean nothing , if UDRPs and the uncertainty and ease with which Felons can try to steal Virtual Business Fondations from their rightful owners is not Checked.
Everything we speak of is tied to the secondary markets Valuations , the cash cow engines that supply the catalyst for our Industry.
The cuurent situation of uncertainty severely impacts and suppresses Secondary Market Valuations!
Uncertainty in Stock Markets cause Bear Narkets. I think you know the far reaching implications here.
Gratefully, Jeff Schneider (Contact Group) (Metal Tiger)
The award for the most surprising partnership has to go to Frank Schilling (Uniregistry) (54) + ISC a NON-Profit controlled by several I* insiders.
You may also want to show a Poll with the FIVE back-end Registry Players that have 70+% of the Applicants as “customers”
The GAC is going to be very impressed at the monopolistic trends of the incumbents.
Since the U.S. Government plan is to walk away from the entire mess and build a new Internet, they apparently are no longer concerned about anti-trust etc.
The new USA Internet is being built mostly by the US FCC and the telco-cable duopoly.
If people can get 100% refunds from ICANN they should grab them and run.
The people who applied for a lot of gTLDs were most likely counting on being able to at least double their investment through the negotiation phase which might result in some buyouts by others, so I don’t think that these people were planning on developing every gTLD on their list, they just wanted to get their foot in the door so that they can sell their interest in some of those gTLDs later on. Whether they’ll be able to do that or not is something that we’ll have to wait and see, it depends in great part on whom they will be in contention with. A lot of the bigger brands might decide to just go through the auction phase so that they can avoid doing any negotiations or buyouts.
Considering some of the heavy weights that are in this game like Google and Amazon I personally think that those smaller companies that went after quantity will have a better chance of at least getting a few of the gTLDs from their list approved and they might have a greater chance of being offered some kind of a deal on the other gTLDs on their list, but those who went after quality with smaller lists will most likely get out bided in the auction phase. (unless off course their application was unique).
(just my opinion)
–
OJohn –
“The people who applied for a lot of gTLDs were most likely counting on being able to at least double their investment through the negotiation phase”
And that is the reason why I put in a $69 minimum bid for a domain at NameJet – a domain that will will easily get $20K-$30K by the end of the auction – that way the eventual buyer can call me and offer me $300 or so not to bid anymore – right 🙂
YOu have made a horrible wrong turn on your logic friend.
“A lot of the bigger brands might decide to just go through the auction phase”
For those not familiar with some of the players…
“we actually raised our own bid”…”no one was bidding against us” 🙂
http: // www. pcmag. com/article2/0,2817,2281382,00.asp
Did Google Game FCC Spectrum Auction?
“Google on Thursday admitted that its ultimate goal in the recent 700 MHz spectrum auction was to drive up the price of the c-block…”
“the commission’s anti-collusion rules prevented any of the 214 approved bidders from commenting on the proceedings…”
“Google placed its bids electronically, and in ten of the bidding rounds, “we actually raised our own bid — even though no one was bidding against us — to ensure aggressive bidding on the C-block,” they wrote.”
Donuts Inc./Demand Media came out with the best portfolio imho. I view them as more of a combined effort than separate given Demand will operate the registry technology as well as be a big factor in their registrar approach. Enom is already developing what looks like a massive retail/reseller model. They could have a huge impact on New gTLDs as a whole if they market heavily.
Donuts is the sole applicant in about 130 strings and also in contention with just one other applicant in about 55 others. Combine that number and you have almost 200 strings which they could aquire relatively easily , given their financial position.
Also, look at their contention opponents, you don’t see google and amazon in too many of them.
They have some very good niche strings free and clear – .shoes, .recipes, careers, credit, domains,education, tours. Also they are the only applicant for many tlds associated with industry niches, or entity names, like .enterprises, .ventures, .solutions, . Most of their uncontested strings have a good niche potential, if this whole thing gains traction.
And they are in a lot of the heavy hitter strings as well, will be interesting to see what their play is – do they go after those big money strings, or let them go and focus on their easy ones. I’d guess they will end up with at least a piece of some of the big ones also.
Radix and Straat, and to some degree, TLDH are in a tough spot because of the Google and Amazon entry. Many of their strings are with multiple applicants which include one, or both of those deep pockets. TLDH came out with a couple of good no contests, including cities.
Uniregistry also got stung by the Amaweb and Google entry. They are in a lot of contention sets, with their uncontested strings sort of obscure and limited, like .blackfriday and .christmas
Regarding Amazon – I think that their closed registry model is in for some serious resistance and bound for difficulty. The community and general media has already picked up on it and are vehemently opposed. I think people underestimate the influence that the GAC, independent objector and ICANN will have over these applications. Closed registry generic string models are not in line with the purpose and mission of the New gTLD program. They will probably also see formal objections from competitors in those verticals.
Google has the most money, and is in a lot of highly valuable strings. Most are proposed as open registry models and so will not face the same level of scrutiny as Amazon. Google could very likely come away with the most sought after strings because they have the deepest pockets and least objectionable models.
Google can change the face of the web as we know it.
The others on the list have the same difficulties – their really good strings are contested, by big boys. They may come away with a handful of smaller niche tlds.
Big Reveal day winners – Donuts and Google
You said:
” YOu have made a horrible wrong turn on your logic friend.”
@ BrianWick
My logic is based on the fact that it will take upwards of half a million dollars to make each gTLd operational and marketable that’s in addition to the 185k application fee and the 25k yearly fee. So unless you are an 800-pond gorilla in this game that can afford to spend a few billion dollars developing all the gTLDs on your list then we should assume that you were counting on getting some buyout offers during the negotiation phase.
–
” Big Reveal day winners – Donuts and Google ”
@ Tom G
That’s what I was thinking too.
–
Tom G –
“Demand – if they market heavily.”
Pretty sure they spent a shitload on .TV and apparantly they sold enoiugh .tv domains to dive in real deep with all these other gtlds.
Point is if you spend enough money you can put quotes around anything – i.e. put it on a billboard and other media sources.
And if you do not have several mils to blow on marketing – you need a .COM
– Real simple – those are the rulkes and those rules are not changing
What we are talking about here is registrars like demand / enom selling non.com – not actually using them – they dont care about that – get in – get out faster – make your dough – and move on.
Brian,
I know we’re on different ends of the discussion of .com as default. You think its set for good, I think it’s in for a big change.
We’re talking Google here – They absolutely have the power to orchestrate a paradigm shift.
OJohn –
“it will take upwards of half a million dollars to make each gTLd operational”
Exactly -at least $500K – so a simple little auction blows out the bottom feeeder speculators costing the ultimate buyer nothing.
This is not like NameJet – where unqualifier bidders drive up the price – and if they get stuck with it – no harm no foul it goes back into auction – this is a real auction here – likely with secured funds.
This is where Monte comes in – weeding out the wankers – and then putting the qualified bidders together – nothing to do with the bottom feeders you elude to looking to double their money
or whatever
if Google has applied for .G this will be the absolute winner of the new TLDs
“Google – they absolutely have the power to orchestrate a paradigm shift.”
Google as well as everone compbined does not supercede the Courts.
How many ACAP / UDRP Claims have been made for a non.com – where the Complainant did NOT own or had NO rights in the .com – mayube a handful.
I do not make the rules – I play by them
@ Super –
You mean like o.co was an overnight sensation for Overstock 🙂
Google’s list is filled with 3 & 4 letter strings. WINNING. Great choices mostly but .art is missing!
oJohn
Anytime there is a “game” there is game playing.
There is no doubt that some applications were placed with the sole thought of getting bought out, but having said that its not necessarily going to work unless the other players think your credible, capable of not only bidding the extension up in an auction but running the TLD .
“Anytime there is a “game” there is game playing.”
===
For Advanced Conspiracy Theory People – Imagine if a large part of the $350,000,000 is not real or came from a couple of major donors.
Evidence: ICANN has said the money has not been “earned” it is just being held. (Has anyone seen it?) Also, it is being held in NON-Interest-bearing accounts. In other words, it could not even be in accounts.
Vegas Casinos like to pay celebrities to mill around and look like they are high-rollers. ICANN could have encouraged “the right people” to show up, knowing they can get a 100% refund or no refund if they did not even pay.
As with large shopping malls, the small players could be paying a disproportionate share. The larger anchor tenants may be on a free pass.
If the small players fold, the large players get their gTLDs without auctions.
The large players could have also bankrolled fake competitors that they can tell to go away when the time is right.
Game playing is not limited by dollars and one can argue the bigger the pot of money the more game playing there is
Wall street game playing is measured in billions if not hundreds of billions and in that world $350 Million is small fry
“$350 Million is small fry”
Yes, and as they say in Washington D.C. – until the units are in Billions or Trillions it is hard to get a Senator’s attention
In all of the history of ISOC, ICANN, ARIN, etc. it has been interesting to see how the internal NON-Profit amounts have always been kept near certain thresholds which advisers must carefully set/monitor to avoid scrutiny. It is not random.
What the Big.Reveal has shown is that once again ICANN has orchestrated “the right people” into their game. It will be interesting to see if the GAC picks up on the fact that the likely candidates never considered being an Applicant.
The result will probably be the .INC gTLD shared by the big THREE. .APP shared by three more players, and finally .WEB shared by another three.
Three new gTLDs and Nine players. ICANN should be able to handle that.
Still yet,, ICANN’t allowing and enabling Soooooooo many new gTLDS over a short time frame is dubious, reckless and largely overkill…..Toooooooo many extentions WILL pollute & dillute & convolute the Internet experience and fluidity
I ‘m focusing my commentary much moreso on the whole Internet/Web experience than just the domainer/domain investor perspective….. again — > Too much of anything isn’t good” .. plain & simple
“Toooooooo many extentions WILL pollute & dillute & convolute the Internet experience”
==========
Agreed, but only if people pay attention to the new extensions.
I think many people who have been on the Internet for awhile, have a set number of websites that they’ve bookmarked and visit faithfully. There are only so many sites one can visit. It’s like Blogs. I have a few dozen that I’ve bookmarked, but I rarely visit any but one or two fairly regularly. And I certainly don’t go to Google to search for more.
So while people will probably visit sites with the new gTLDs out of curiosity, and may even find some favorites among them, they’ll likely tend to stick with established sites that they already like and feel comfortable and familiar with.
If it was 1994 and all this was happening, .COM probably would have never become #1. But it will be nearly 20 years later when these gTLDs become active and websites finally begin to be created for them. Sure, young visitors new to the Internet will be more open to the new gTLDs. When they’re not spending hours on sites like Facebook(.com) or YouTube(.com), anyway…
@Grim
‘When they’re not spending hours on sites like Facebook(.com) or YouTube(.com), anyway’
You meant . . channel.YouTube
right?
Good luck to all of them, two stalls is a market place and the higher the base cost the better. Amazon.COM & Google.COM can / will change the cognitive thinking at level two as well as raising the root domain COM level up another notch.
“If it was 1994 and all this was happening, .COM probably would have never become #1.”
=====
.COM became #1 because of U.S. Government backing and price-capping
.NET and .ORG tagged along for the ride…and $$$$
At each stage the I* insiders made sure that their cronies were well-funded for world travel, smoozing, etc.
Government leaders were given the mushroom treatment as PRIVATE actors exploited the largely clueless population that immigrated to “the Net”
Those PRIVATE actors now plan to take their game to a new level. The “scripts” are written. You are expected to sit back, watch, and keep your mouth shut. [[[They]]] know what is best for you.
Lets not forget about the City Tlds, I believe that those will become some of the most popular and widely used strings once all the major Cities have been represented by their own TLD.
–
“Amazon.COM & Google.COM can”
The ©.Single.Symbol.® Top Level Domains should change the game.
Amazon.® & Google.® can change the cognitive thinking…
The ISOC – IETF does not allow ICANN to touch .© .☺ .® .☼ 🙂
@Tom G
“You meant . . channel.YouTube. right?”
No, that’s not what I meant at all, Tom. “Channel.YouTube” is just a mess of a name. Plus it just leads me to an error page. So I’m not sure why you’re confused as to what I meant. Especially for such a well-known site like YouTube.com.
@Grim
This is from the Google .YouTube TLD application:
“The sole purpose of the proposed gTLD, .youtube, is to host select YouTube channels’ digital content. The proposed gTLD will introduce a dedicated Internet space in which select YouTube channel providers can link to the content hosted on their respective YouTube page. ”
Google will be giving .YouTube accounts their own second level name. So, users would not be viewing content on YouTube.com, but on a dedicated second level namespace beneath the .YouTube top level domain.
Alright, Tom. When it happens in a year or so, I’ll be sure to properly refer to it as “channel.YouTube.” But for now, I’ll stick to what we have.
This convo on .youtube channels is instructive: Capitulation.
Time to WAKE UP all you dot commers. The biggest corps on the web are stampeding to right of the dot addresses.
Rotd is the new wild west and it will be where the action is. DNJournal’s sales lists are going to filled with these new extensions for years. It’s not a bad thing. It’s not the end of dot com any more than Europe ended after 1492.
Archiba, we already have plenty of alternatives to .com. ROTD is really nothing new, except for how it’s being played out ($$$) this time. There’s a lot of “action” to be found in Vegas, too, but the vast majority of that action is pocketed by the casinos, (or ICANN, in this case), not the overly-optimistic players.