Recently over at Namepros there was this discussion about the dot coms vs other TLDs. Â Much of the discussion was based on the effects of the new policy by ICANN to lower it’s standards for accepting new TLDs. Â Previously it was a rigorous process often resulting in years of paperwork and ultimately many were turned down including the controversial dot xxx.
Here was one persons comment:
Think of the web as a big country. Around the country various cities & towns have sprung up. One of the first was the city of COM. Lovely place, one of the oldest cities & people & businesses starting moving in years ago.
As time went on the city started to get pretty crowded especially around the city centre where the first and best houses & commercial premises were leased out. This demand put pressure on supply so that the cost of living and doing business in this dress circle area became higher & higher so people looked for more affordable areas within COM.
Now let’s take one of the most sought after pieces of real estate in the world. MANHATTAN. Anyone from NYC will now agree with me that he is 100% wrong with his analogy. Â People can live 30 minutes away and pay a lot less and have more space. Instead they pay the premium to live in the city. The prices in Manhattan have skyrocketed.Â Even in today’s market the real estate there fetches a very high premium.
Let’s take another real world example by using historical data on exactly what has happened with the introduction of new TLD’s.
Since the release of every TLD how has CNO actually done? Suprisingly well. I am sure 8 years ago people thought info would take a chunk away. Then came even more extensions. What has changed? Now they want unlimited extensions! So what. There is nothing to indicate COM will falter because of new extensions no matter what the extension is. The only way CNO’s will get hurt if a new method is used instead of URLs.
Here are the only stats I could find at the time of this writing. Â If anyone can find better ones please let me know.
COM Jan 2004 = 25,999,725
NET Jan 2004 = 4,315,306
ORG Jan 2004 = 2,760,196
INFO Jan 2004 = 1,083,688
BIZ Jan 2004 = 912,827
COM Jan 2008 = 71,533,589
NET Jan 2008 = 10,634,627
ORG Jan 2008 = 6,373,060
INFO Jan 2008 = 4,945,475
BIZ Jan 2008 = 1,901,814
COM = 275%
NET = 246%
ORG = 230%
INFO = 456%
BIZ = 208%
INFO stats look good except for one thing. The INFO entry cost is extremely low. Also for 4 out of the last 6 months the amount of deletions are greater than the amount of registrations. As you can see on the chart I created that as you extend further away from COM the less percentage of registrations. It’s a nice pyramid imho. We don’t have enough information about MOBI to include it. At these continued rate of increases you should easily see the pattern that COM is going to continue being dominant as it has in the past.