...

View Full Version : TLD suffixes



MattF
06-21-2011, 04:12 PM
Doesn't exactly seem the smartest of ideas, IMHO.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/icanns-new-domain-suffix-stampede/2011/03/03/AGzQrZdH_blog.html

oracleguy
06-21-2011, 05:00 PM
Agreed, it seems like a bad idea. However ICANN will make a butt load of money which is probably the driving reason behind this.

bcarl314
06-21-2011, 05:02 PM
Anyone want to get together and go in for .vom ???

MattF
06-21-2011, 06:11 PM
It'd take a fair few ten bobs to save up for one of those. :D

Fumigator
06-21-2011, 08:16 PM
ICANN is insisting the registration fee and yearly fee will barely cover administrative costs and the inevitable legal wrangling that is sure to occur.

I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt-- it did take them 6 years to agree to the final draft, after all. Hopefully during those 6 years they've come up with a good way to administer this craziness.

I'm also kind of excited about the idea that these lame domain hoarders are going to see their inventory's value drop to near zero. I won't need your goodtimes.com, thank you very much-- I'll just take goodtimes.usa (or whatever). They'll never be able to monopolize EVERY suffix now.

MattF
06-21-2011, 09:05 PM
I'm also kind of excited about the idea that these lame domain hoarders are going to see their inventory's value drop to near zero. I won't need your goodtimes.com, thank you very much-- I'll just take goodtimes.usa (or whatever). They'll never be able to monopolize EVERY suffix now.

That is one possible benefit, although how much it will realistically affect them remains to be seen. The old suffixes, especially the original eight?, have been around so long now that a lot of people still class those as the ones to have.

It would have been a lot better if they just put some effort into sorting the speculators out rather than allowing trashy extensions, IMHO.

Fumigator
06-21-2011, 10:21 PM
Yes but there's really no way to judge a legit ownership vs. a placeholder ownership. That's a level of censorship I wouldn't be comfortably with, even if it did solve a problem I find to be extremely annoying.

The big suffixes are only "the ones to have" because public perception has been those are the only ones out there. Once the dummies-- er, the public sector realizes there can be any kind of name for a website, I think the stranglehold on dot COM will grow weak. But as you point out, it all remains to be seen. People are creatures of habit, repetition, and followers of the alpha dog, after all. Look at Facebook for the best (and saddest) example of this.

If I had more balls I'd invest into a common suffix name, hoping it gets popular and sells a lot of domains, from which I'd get a slice. 185 investors into a suffix is pretty reasonable.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum