closed 1Climate.com , can you please evaluate this domain?

[ProDome]

Heya domainers,

I handreg this domain after seeing a child put up a big card protesting about how the world's climate is being handled.

Can anyone please give comments on how much this domain can potentially be worth?

Thanks

Nash

 

[WhoDatDog]

I think it might be worth a bit more than reg fee, but just barely. Of course, Climate1.com would be better, but 1Climate.com seems to almost make sense, which is more than can be said for a lot of names here.

I probably wouldn't register it, and you probably couldn't sell it here for much, if at all, but since it is a small notch above many of the recent names I have appraised, I am going to give you an appraisal of 20 bucks. It might be worth something, but not a lot. If you have a passion for climate related issues, then it certainly makes sense for a site about that, but I am fairly confident that the odds of hand-regging a valuable climate related name today are pretty low.

Good luck.

 

[ProDome]

Thanks WhoDatDog (sorry, I didn't get your name).

Just out of curiousity, what is your take on the new .co tld?

Best regards

Nash

 

[WhoDatDog]

My take on the .co extentions is that it is useless. It doesn't make any sense. Imagine actually starting a legitimate site ending in .co, most of the people will think that it is a typo and should be .com. Imagine auctions with .co names....half the people bidding will be cancelling when they realize it is .co and not .com. There will be some highly publicized disasters and disagreements......trust me.

One think you will not see very much of in the next 20 years.........major advertising campaigns with .co. You almost can't even fathom hearing a radio ad with .co. Is it dot C O, or dot COE (imagine the confusion). No sane person or smart business would ever invest real money into .co if they did not own the dotcom, and the Overstock.com deal for O.co reeks of a marketing deal for the .co registry.

It is idiotic and disappointing to have to witness all of the lies and fake sales that are starting now. Be prepared for the scammers to run wild touting sales to themselves, and faking transactions to those fake sales are listed at Dn Journal. I do not respect anybody who has a high opinion of .co. There is no way to think it is good for the Internet, domainers, or life in general, unless you are planning to be a pumper of garbage names or otherwise have some special deal with the .co registry.

It is a terrible extention with so many problems everywhere you turn that it boggles the mind.

 

[ProDome]

Thanks for that WhoDatDog, very enlightening.

From what I gather, in order of importance, the tlds are:

1. .com
2. .co.uk
3. .net
4. .org

What do you think of other TLDS (for example .info or .biz) and other ccTLD (e.g., .tv, .me, .fm, etc.) ?

Thanks

Best

Nash

 

[WhoDatDog]

.biz is a worthless extention. No serious person or business would use it. Just stick to dotcom. The other three you mention have value....co.uk, .net, and .org, but you shouldn't be buying anything there until you are very successfull with .com. Most people look to alternate extentions because they feel that all of the good names are taken in dotcom. That is the wrong approach because it has you moving away from the stongest names.

My theory is that dotcom is the beautiful girl, so you need to figure out a way to play at the highest level. The alternate extentions are the ugly girls. That is the way the world works. Dotcom doesn't need any type of rationalization. It is the top of the line, so if you are going to play, you might as well play to win. Most people who have success with the other extentions have also had tremendous success with dotcom, but 99 percent of the other people flush their money down the toilet.

 

[ProDome]

Cheers WhoDatDog

The way you write speaks directly to the face, but I guess in order to learn some things shouldn't be sugar-coated.

Best

Nash

 

[WhoDatDog]

Well, that's the way it turned out. Nobody knew for sure that .com would have a stranglehold. Just like Coca Cola. I could give you 50 Billion dollars and you couldn't put a dent into Coca Cola sales. You may think you have a cola that tastes just as good, and after all, it is a cola, but there is one Coca Cola, and it is stronger than even Pepsi, though most adults prefer Pepsi. When people are at a restaurant and they ask for a coke, the waiter will often say: "is Pepsi ok?" They never ask for a Pepsi with the waiter then asking if Coke is ok. That is how strong Coca Cola is, and dotcom is even stronger than that, and the other extentions aren't even in Pepsi's league.

If someone told you about a website that was at .net, there is a good chance you would type in .com just out of habit, but if someone told you there was a website at .com, you would NEVER type in .net by accident. That is strong stuff, so why fight it? That is why it is a such a joke that those who pump the loser extentions actually think that if they sit around in their underwear and throw up a site at dotmobi or .us, or .co, that it actually matters. It is over before it even starts. Most all of the UDRP's are for dotcom names. That should also tell you something. Big companies mostly don't even care if you infringe on their names in loser extentions. Everyone knows that dotcom matters the most, by far.

Most of the alternate extentions fall into the obscure soda or pop league. It doesn't really matter that you can throw up a website on it. It cannot ever compete with coke, even if you gave away the drink for a nickel you can't overcome coke in sales. That is mind share (and usage) that you cannot overcome. People who drink 5 cokes today will be drinking 5 tomorrow, and all 5 will taste just as good....they won't get tired of it, either. They are not switching up to a cheaper brand. When it comes to making money you need to be in dotcom., unless you live in the United Kingdom you could use .co.uk. There are a few other extensions that are ok for specific country uses.

Dotcom is used everywhere....just like Cocal Cola. If Warren Buffett were a domain investor he would have only dotcom. He happens to own 10 percent of Coca Cola, as well.

 

[ProDome]

Thanks WhoDatDog. Really strong views. I appreciate that.

I guess for domaining, I would focus on dotcoms. But if building a website, I found success with .net and .org. But of course, you need to all the SEO and stuff to get organic traffic from google.

 

[WhoDatDog]

There are many problems with building sites on extentions like .net and .org. One of the problems is.....the more successful a site you have the bigger your dilemma will be. There are very few highly successul companies that have been started on those other extentions without that company also having the dotcom.

It is not even in the realm of possibility to imagine a famous site being at Hotels.net, where someone else owned Hotels.com. Whatever examples there are of smaller companies having success on .net, etc. is a really low percentage of all of the successful companies.

You guys who do SEO are missing the bigger point. There are no guarantees of you ever getting on the first page of Google.....not matter what you do. If yoo have a good dotcom name and good SEO, then you are doing all that you can do. Each category of business has many players who are all trying to climb the SEO ladder. The best way to do that is to have a good business at the category killer dotcom name.


If someone is decent looking and they go to the gym and excercise and eat well, then they play at the highest social level there is, but if you are below average looking you could go to the gym every day for the rest of your life and still not compete with the good-looking person, even if the good-looking person rarely went to the gym. There is a hierarchy. If you think about most of the huge Internet companies, they mostly develop out of the top tier schools. There are lots of reasons for that. One of the reasons is that there are opportunities to take the business to the next level because there are connections and people with money associated with those schools.

Miscrosoft.........Bill Gates started it at Harvard...dropped out.

Yahoo...........Started by Stanford students.

Google..........Started by Stanford studetns.

Facebook......Started by Harvard student.


So, does that mean that it isn't possible to start a company like above if you go to school at a small community college in the United States? No, theoretically it is possible, but if your goal is start a company like the ones above, then you need to be at a top tier school, or you are running up again bad math. And you for sure better go to a school in the United States, since that is the where the largest economy in the world is. That doesn't mean that it cannot be done in other countries or at community colleges, and it doesn't mean that won't be exceptions, but the power is the power, so you can go with the flow or fight a likely losing war by trying to overcome the odds.

I am not even a fan of Harvard, and I don't have a negative opinion of Stanford, but that is where the power lies. If you want to be President of the United States your best bet is to go to Harvard. If you are a great person who goes to some small college in the middle of nowhere, then being President of the United States of America is not something that you need to be day-dreaming about. It won't be happening. That is the way of the world today.