Implosion ("death spiral") of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs)

["DAVID FARBER" <dfarber () me com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
> Date: March 9, 2017 at 11:11:28 AM EST
> To: nnsquad () nnsquad org
> Subject: [ NNSquad ] Implosion ("death spiral") of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs)
>
>
> Implosion ("death spiral") of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs)
>
> Forwarded with permission. My comments follow the forwarded message.
>
> ----- Forwarded message from George Kirikos <george () loffs com> -----
>
> Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 01:08:45 -0500
> From: George Kirikos <george () loffs com>
> Subject: Re: New TLD Lunacy blog article
> To: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
>
> Hi Lauren,
>
> It's been a long time.....I hope you're well.
>
> You might be pleased to know that the ICANN new gTLDs program is
> imploding. See the latest debacle at:
>
> http://domainincite.com/21603-schilling-big-price-increases-needed-to-keep-new-gtlds-alive
>
> http://domainnamewire.com/2017/03/07/yikes-death-spiral-new-top-level-domain-names/
>
> https://onlinedomain.com/2017/03/08/domain-name-news/frank-schilling-just-killed-new-gtld-domain-name-program-warning/
>
> https://www.namepros.com/threads/16-new-tlds-will-get-price-increases-of-up-to-3-000.1005439/
>
> So far, the reporting is only within the domain name industry
> blogs/forums. It'll be interesting to see what happens once it reaches
> the traditional/mainstream media. (perhaps once price increase notices
> is given to customers, although ICANN rules don't even require
> registrars to send out such notices!)
>
> Other registrars and new gTLD registry operators are trying to do
> damage control, to spin the story with empty promises, but it's too
> little, too late:
>
> http://www.domaininvesting.com/rightside-focused-on-building-relationships/
>
> http://www.domaininvesting.com/godaddy-comments-on-uniregistry-price-increase/
>
> It's a problem due to ICANN ignoring all the input of people like
> yourself way back when.
>
> On the bright side, you can sleep well knowing you were on the right
> side of that debate.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> George Kirikos
> CEO
>
> --- Forwarded message ends ---
>
> Well, I take no real pleasure from this. It was entirely predictable,
> because it was clear from the outset that there was no intrinsic demand
> for the vast majority of these new gTLDs, except within the
> domain-industrial complex itself (the" domainers") who had convinced
> themselves that these were a gold mine, and falsely assumed that suckers
> would rush to buy them.
>
> A few of the new gTLDs have been "relatively" successful, but nearly all
> of the rest are mainly viewed by the public as trash heaps most likely
> to be the source of spam, phishing attacks, and other frauds. As such,
> many of these new gTLDs are widely blocked. These even include gTLDs
> like .xyz, which is pretty much as polluted as the rest, despite the
> presence of Alphabet's (extremely limited) home page within there.
>
> Another prediction I made early on was that the plethora of new gTLDs
> would serve to *increase* the value of .com domains, since the latter
> would increasingly be viewed as the primary "real" gTLD apart from the
> clutter of all the new trash gTLDs. Anecdotal evidence very strongly
> suggests that this has been the case.
>
> Finally, I'll note that being right about this stuff, plus one dollar,
> will buy you a cup of pretty crummy coffee.
>
> --Lauren--



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170309133007:6663A868-04F6-11E7-AF62-8D20A5EBD444
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com