A few .mobi questions

[mjnels]

I explained this quite clearly. Since you guys don't like to say your beloved mobis get no traffic, I had to find out for myself. I've concluded .mobis get no traffic. It's time to dump my one .mobi. What do you think I can get?

...except for the 100 times or so that i told you .mobis dont get natural type in traffic everytime you started a thread about it.

 

[Gerry]

Okay, I am at work, time to make rounds, I'll come back and play later. Hopefully the freezing rain forecasted will keep the dumbasses home.

Then again, the forecast is 100% chance of freezing rain.

And we know what happens when the forecast is 100% certainty.

Just like many are 100% certain in .mobi's demise.

Still looking for that final nail.

 

[Fearless]

I assure you there are members, lurking around here, who are knocking down 4 figures per month with their .mobi sites.

Arbitrage would be the only possible way and I can't even see how that would work. Pay Google for a click to go to a limited mobey site. That's a money losing proposition.

 

[think]

Arbitrage would be the only possible way and I can't even see how that would work. Pay Google for a click to go to a limited mobey site. That's a money losing proposition.

I am sorry that your ONE Dot Mobi domain isn't getting a lot of type in traffic. Perhaps you should develop it.

To presume that only arbitrage can produce revenue for mobile site is not being realistic. Believe it or not developed mobile sites whether they are Dot Mobi or m.name.com do get traffic and can make revenue.

Although my Mobi development has been stalled due to personal problems and hasn't reached any great levels and creates no revenue, I am still getting traffic for my Bars.mobi site. It is still a very basic Google driven site but the traffic is fairly significant:

Month # requests page requests
1. November 2006 439 239
2. December 2006 663 482
3. January 2007 700 531
4. February 2007 766 603
5. March 2007 1,078 834
6. April 2007 1,097 925
7. May 2007 1,450 1,145
8. June 2007 1,402 1,189
9. July 2007 2,612 2,279
10. August 2007 3,071 2,328
11. September 07 2,527 1,787
12. October 2007 3,202 2,634
13. November 07 2,670 2,180
14. December 07 3,036 2,363
15. January 2008 3,432 2,645

Most active month January 2008 : 2,645 pages sent.

Now this is the important part. These visitors are coming from CELL PHONES! These are the browsers used to find my site:

1. Nokia6682/2.0 (3.01.1) SymbianOS/8.0 Series60/2.6 Profile/MIDP-2.0 configuration/CLDC-1.1 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0 (compatible;YahooSeeker/M1A1-R2D2; http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/ysearch/crawling/crawling-01.html) 2,795

2. SonyEricssonK800i/R1ED Browser/NetFront/3.3 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 (Mediobot/1.0 http://bot.medio.com) 2,137

3. SonyEricssonK750i/R1L Browser/SEMC-Browser/4.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 2,014

4. Nokia6820/2.0 (5.88) Profile/MIDP-1.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0/1.0 (Jumpbot; http://www.jumptap.com/jumpbot; [email protected]) 1,922

5. Nokia6820/2.0 (4.83) Profile/MIDP-1.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0 (compatible; Googlebot-Mobile/2.1; http://www.google.com/bot.html) 976

6. Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Yahoo! Slurp; http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/ysearch/slurp) 969

7. NokiaN70-1/3.0546.2.3 Series60/2.8 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 624

8. Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Googlebot/2.1; http://www.google.com/bot.html) 512

9. Nokia6680/1.0 (4.04.07) SymbianOS/8.0 Series60/2.6 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Java/1.5.0_11 512

10. msnbot/1.0 ( http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm) 427

11. MSMOBOT Mozilla/2.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.02; Windows CE; Default) 402

12. Nokia6680/1.0 (4.04.07) SymbianOS/8.0 Series60/2.6 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 388

13. msnbot-media/1.0 ( http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm)
353

14. Nokia6680/1.0 (4.04.07) SymbianOS/8.0 Series60/2.6 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Java/1.5.0_08 342

15. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 282

16. Java/1.5.0_08 278

17. MSNBOT_Mobile MSMOBOT Mozilla/2.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.02; Windows CE; Default) 255

18. Nokia6820/2.0 (5.88) Profile/MIDP-1.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0/Nutch-0.9 (http://lucene.apache.org/nutch/about.html; http://lucene.apache.org/nutch/bot.html; [email protected]) 237

19. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; Roadrunner) 231

20. Nokia6680/1.0 ((4.04.07) SymbianOS/8.0 Series60/2.6 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 (botmobi find.mobi/bot.html) ) 226

21. Nokia6680/1.0 ((4.04.07) SymbianOS/8.0 Series60/2.6 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1) 211

22. FAST Enterprise Crawler 6 used by My Company ([email protected]) 210

23. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1) 202

24. Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071127 Firefox/2.0.0.11 198

25. MOT-T720/G_05.07.23R MIB/2.0 Profile/MIDP-1.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0 UP.Link/1.1/1.0 (Jumpbot; http://www.jumptap.com/jumpbot; [email protected]) 187

26. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 6.12) SprintPC6800 173

27. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 159

28. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible ; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) 143

29. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 137

30. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506) 137

31. Nokia6680/1.0 ((4.04.07) SymbianOS/8.0 Series60/2.6 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 (for mobile crawler) ) 137

32. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) 129

33. MOT-NCR_0/00.62 UP.Browser/6.2.3.4.c.1.115 (GUI) MMP/2.0 127

34. Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070725 Firefox/2.0.0.6 126

35. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727) 112

36. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; PPC; 240x320) 111

37. Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070309 Firefox/2.0.0.3 109

38. LGE-AX8600/1.0 UP.Browser/6.2.3.8 (GUI) MMP/2.0 105

39. Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1) 100

40. Wazobi Bot 1.0 (Wazobi.mobi) 98
[not listed: 1100] 9,243

This report was generated on January 31, 2008 04:41.
Report time frame November 23, 2006 21:08 to January 30, 2008 23:57.
Web statistics report produced by: analog 5.1 /

Believe it or not people are starting to use their cell phone to find information on the internet. What they are looking for and how they look for it will differ from PC searches.

The age of mobile internet is here and it will continue to grow. Mobile internet will not replace PC Dot Com based internet but rather it will run parallel to it. Not all dot Com sites will want to or even provide information that is important for mobile search. This is why Dot Mobi has a purpose and potential. No, Dot Mobi has not become a proven TLD in comparison to Dot Com but it does have the POTENTIAL to serve a specific purpose and to be a strong and useful TLD.

I hope some of this makes sense to those that are new to this debate. Best wishes to all and may you profit from your domain investments and endeavors.

 

[Gerry]

Arbitrage would be the only possible way and I can't even see how that would work. Pay Google for a click to go to a limited mobey site. That's a money losing proposition.

Right! So why pay Google?

Rather, have google pay the site owner.

Enter Adsense for Mobile!

 

[Fearless]

To presume that only arbitrage can produce revenue for mobile site is not being realistic. Believe it or not developed mobile sites whether they are Dot Mobi or m.name.com do get traffic and can make revenue.

Although my Mobi development has been stalled due to personal problems and hasn't reached any great levels and creates no revenue

You just proved my point. So now because you have all this traffic that makes no revenue, your keyword.mobi is worth $100K to some clueless sucker.
All you .mobi fanatics have proven is that cell phone traffic is worth much less than Chinese traffic.

 

[iDName]

You just proved my point. So now because you have all this traffic that makes no revenue, your keyword.mobi is worth $100K to some clueless sucker.
All you .mobi fanatics have proven is that cell phone traffic is worth much less than Chinese traffic.

All you've proven is that you're not an entrepreneur, you're just a domainer.

 

[Gerry]

You just proved my point. So now because you have all this traffic that makes no revenue, your keyword.mobi is worth $100K to some clueless sucker.
All you .mobi fanatics have proven is that cell phone traffic is worth much less than Chinese traffic.

I wonder how many other geniuses said the same this about .com and the internet 15 years ago.

It is called P-O-T-E-N-T-I-A-L.

 

[Fearless]

I wonder how many other geniuses said the same this about .com and the internet 15 years ago.

It is called P-O-T-E-N-T-I-A-L.

You guys need to stop comparing .mobi to .com. .bes have more potential than .mobis.

 

[NameGuy]

It's amazing how quickly every discussion on this subject turns into the pro-mobey people crying the same thing to every dissenter, "Everyone is stupid except me!!". It's like any opinion which doesn't agree with them is the equivalent to a punch in the nuts.

 

[Gerry]

You guys need to stop comparing .mobi to .com. .bes have more potential than .mobis.

Why, cause you say so?

There is no comparison? Because you say so?

You buy a domain that you think is the bomb and that is exactly what happened...it bombed.

You want and seek immediate gratification for your purchase.

Okay, here it is.

Oh, Greg, that is such a good name.

Every damn body is comparing .com to .mobi.

Sorry you could not immediately flip this into a few hundred K.

I guess that proves you made a mistake, don't want to take any advice or suggestions, and proves you don't have that midas touch afterall.

What an awakening!

It's amazing how quickly every discussion on this subject turns into the pro-mobey people crying the same thing to every dissenter, "Everyone is stupid except me!!". It's like any opinion which doesn't agree with them is the equivalent to a punch in the nuts.

Point is, everyone is saying mobi is a waste of time and not needed and will fail.

Their reasons are their opinions.

Thank you for sharing yours which really clears all of this up.

 

[Fearless]

Every damn body is comparing .com to .mobi.

Nope, only you mobey fanatics.

 

[iDName]

http://www.w3.org/2005/Talks/1213-sb-w3c-tech/manycallers-mobilepic.jpg

 

[Gerry]

Nope, only you mobey fanatics.

Sorry, greg. But you want to compare this, .mobi, to a dot com in traffic and revenue.

Everytime I turn around it is someone saying this will not replace dot com, it will never take over dot com, dot com is all that is needed.

Granted, a few misinformed souls may feel that .mobi will be the successor to dot com.

But why are we not talking .net or .org. Where was all the chit-chat with that when those were introduced? Where was all the we don't need them talk?

No one cared. That was when the internet was not controlled by domainers.

Guess what.

It is still not controlled by domainers.

Hard to believe, isn't it.

Hard to accept the fact that not a soul on or off this forum will sabotage or de-rail .mobi. That must really piss some domainers off.

 

[iDName]

.

 

[think]

You just proved my point. So now because you have all this traffic that makes no revenue, your keyword.mobi is worth $100K to some clueless sucker.
All you .mobi fanatics have proven is that cell phone traffic is worth much less than Chinese traffic.

First you claim there is no traffic. Now since I have shown traffic , purpose , and use, you say the traffic is worthless. The reason my site makes no money is it wasn't made with any methods to make any revenue. The problem isn't the traffic but my ability to monetize it. This is coupled with the mobile market being new and there aren't as many ways to make cash on the mobile web currently.

I have dot com sites that make no revenue currently as well but I don't think the traffic they get is worthless. I just understand my ability to monetize the traffic is poor on my part. I have no intentions of giving up on developing Dot Com sites either. For that matter I hope to develop other TLDs like Dot TV as well.

My claims of not being able to monetize both Dot Com and Dot Mobi traffic shows that it isn't a matter of intelligence but rather a difference of opinion and a different perspective when it relates to the facts.

As far as your claim that my domain is only worth $100,000 to some clueless sucker well, I don't think it is currently worth that much and I guess the sucker is me since I intend to keep working on the site and making it into a site that creates revenue. I might fail but I really think people will continue to use the site and there are ways to create income.

 

[sashas]

how do you monetize .mobi sites? How does AdSense for Mobiles work? Most people who click on AdSense ads on computers do so because they happen to think its part of the site (hence the tendency to make the ads in the same format/color as the site). How do you think that can happen on a mobile phone when the information is concise and there is no free roaming mouse pointer? Wouldn't a surfer on a mobile site click on ads only if he really wanted to, as opposed to casual clicking, as it happens on a PC, because of the simple fact that you're much more conscious of ads (as they are more prominent) on a mobile than on a PC?

 

[mjnels]

how do you monetize .mobi sites? How does AdSense for Mobiles work? Most people who click on AdSense ads on computers do so because they happen to think its part of the site (hence the tendency to make the ads in the same format/color as the site). How do you think that can happen on a mobile phone when the information is concise and there is no free roaming mouse pointer? Wouldn't a surfer on a mobile site click on ads only if he really wanted to, as opposed to casual clicking, as it happens on a PC, because of the simple fact that you're much more conscious of ads (as they are more prominent) on a mobile than on a PC?

your question should be: how do you properly monetize ANY mobile targeted website (not just .mobi)...

the answer is: none of us really know yet.


trust me, someone/some company will figure out how to properly monetize mobile websites... these are the dinosaur days of mobile computing right now.. mobile advertising is going to become a multi-billion dollar industry.

but for now, welcome to the dark ages of internet-on-mobile-devices.... where nobody really has any real answers... speculation and new ideas are alive and well right now..

 

[katherine]

At this point .mobi should be treated like any other exotic extension like .ws or .cc: little or no type-in traffic to be expected without promotion. Plain simple.

 

[acc]

At this point .mobi should be treated like any other exotic extension like .ws or .cc: little or no type-in traffic to be expected without promotion. Plain simple.

To those who don't like or believe in .mobi and have been dissing it from day one - that is your prerogative, your opinion, and that's fine. But comparing .mobi to .ws or .cc is a very poor, very weak argument. Those are country codes for very small little-known countries. Consumer markets with large economies will not likely come accross or use or understand what a .ws or .cc is. They have basically been hijacked by domainers who have tried to rebrand them into something that will sell. Only domainers have any somewhat serious level of interest in them. For domain holders with .ws and .cc names, that is their prerogative, their choice of investment, and that's fine. Best of luck. We are all domainers and take risks.

Now .mobi is a new worldwide gTLD (not ccTLD) that is self-branded with a real-world purpose - to brand "mobi" to mean "mobile". Worldwide mobile. And it IS gaining acceptance by businesses large and small. In only just over a year since its introduction it is starting to catch on ... not just in the domainer world but in the REAL world. There are DAILY reports of businesses large and small adopting .mobi and building out sites using it. Just look at all the new threads mentioning them. That continually gets the goat of mobi-dissers. The latest finds posted were volvocars.mobi and airfrance.mobi - not domainers trying to make it work, but world class businesses puting up .mobi websites. Businesses see value in reaching new buyers and providing their existing customers another service venue.

There is no debate left as to whether or not the online mobile world will take off. It IS happening right before our eyes. Advertising budgets go to where the eyeballs are. Mobile web will not replace but will supplement and reinforce the desktop web. However, expecting to immediately monitize every eyeball view is a limited domainer-only-PPC-centric understanding of advertisinig and marketing. There is so much more to reaching consumers and business decision makers than expecting immediate PPC income from any website - mobile or PC.

Just think of billboards - You don't click on them as you drive by - yet they have real marketing value.
Just think of TV commercials - You don't click on them - yet they can have powerful brand building value.
Just think of magazine ads - You don't click on them as you read - yet they have image marking value.

Now think of .mobi websites - today they can be used to attract eyeballs to help get a marketing message out to the new "mobile" web. Tomorrow they will be used to do that AND much more. Numerous companies will be competing to get .mobi websites to deliver their pay-per-click and pay-per-action offerings. Dissing .mobi will not stop it from moving forward.