Is a .NET strong enough to build a business around?

[dcristo]

The low barrier to entry means you will always have a lot of competition in markets where there is money to make.

 

[Shane]

The low barrier to entry means you will always have a lot of competition in markets where there is money to make.

This is very true. I tend to approach markets that aren't easily monetized to avoid extreme market saturation. Sponsored content can be very profitable if executed properly. Content based sites are also appealing due to the limited amount of upkeep required after a successful launch. I've never had much luck with e-commerce. Plus I cringe when I hear about paid advertising campaigns.

 

[katherine]

It depends on your ambitions.
If you are looking to build the next google or something like that I think you need the .com.
I don't think there is one single .net in the FT500 list, they are all .com (I'm not sure but maybe there was lg.net years ago).

But you can still build a reasonably large-scale project on a .net. Especially for anything that is computer/Internet/networking related .net will fit in nicely.

.net is an old extension and I like the old fashioned touch.

 

[DigiNames]

Is a .NET strong enough to build a business around?

Your username is your answer.

 

[Shane]

It depends on your ambitions.
If you are looking to build the next google or something like that I think you need the .com.
I don't think there is one single .net in the FT500 list, they are all .com (I'm not sure but maybe there was lg.net years ago).

But you can still build a reasonably large-scale project on a .net. Especially for anything that is computer/Internet/networking related .net will fit in nicely.

.net is an old extension and I like the old fashioned touch.

It's worth noting that the FT500 list doesn't contain typical businesses. I'm sure if Google started on a .INFO it would still be stupidly successful.

Your username is your answer.

Lol. Well played sir.

 

[4u-domains]

We can't always obtain or afford the .com variant of a name that we have fallen in love with for a major venture.

In these cases, the country code of the major countries is usually the best, followed by the .net. Your site and marketing strategy will then determine how detrimental not having the .com will be. Of course, once the site is success then you will get people naturally typing in the .com first, even when they have been to your site before.

Therefore, the biggest cause for concern here is that if the .com has the same business and business model as you then you will suffer at their hands. If you spent $25,000 on marketing hosting.net, for example, then hosting.com will get a few % of extra business.

If there is enough differentiation between the two then there is a lot less to worry about IMO.

To conclude, if I saw the .com and .co.uk (for me) was the same as my business offer then, even if the name was perfect, I would try and use an alternative .com instead of just accepting the .net or .org .

 

[Shane]

I don't see the country code option being viable, at least, for the United States. I do agree that competing with the .com will cause some issues. Luckily for me all of the other extensions are being used for something unrelated which makes my .net the best option for this niche. Have you had much success with .co.uk? Ive noticed that the .ca and .co.uk seem to be trusted more than a .us.

 

[dcristo]

Yeah ccTLD is not even a consideration unless you are targeting a specific demographic. I don't think it's a case of being more trusted, there just are very few .us developed sites.

 

[EM @MAJ.com]

I don't think there is one single .net in the FT500 list, they are all .com (I'm not sure but maybe there was lg.net years ago).

I don't see a .net in the FT500 list, and I also don't see any domain names sold at least a million in FT500 list either.
Here's the top40 million dollars sales.
http://www.king.net/million-dollar-sales/million-dollar-sales-table/

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Shane]

@dcristo - Would you enter personally information on a .us? Lol

@king - I don't think the extension correlates with their success. If any of those businesses used a .co they'd still be wildly successful.

 

[dcristo]

@Almost Not sure what you're asking.

 

[Shane]

You were saying you don't think there is a lack of trust associated with the .us just a lack of developed websites. Would you enter your personal information? I would never enter my credit card information on a cctld. I don't trust websites built on those extensions regardless of perceived quality.

 

[katherine]

In most developed countries the local extension is very strong and often preferred to .com.
.com is still popular for global sites, but less for local use.
The US is an exception, being the only major country that shuns its own extension.
So, outside the US, in order of preference it's something like: .com > ccTLD > .net > other

 

[4u-domains]

The US has not really taken up use of .us .

Certainly, it cannot be compared to .co.uk which is the actual TLD of choice for businesses in the UK, apart from the ones with a truly global presence.

The sites I most visit are:

bbc.co.uk
google.co.uk
.. local businesses, nearly all of which end in .co.uk (including my own)

US wise, as I mentioned, I would rather have a lesser .com than a perfect .net . A .us TLD would be lower down the pecking order.

Strange how the USA never engaged with the .us. It must have been a lack of marketing initially, lack of American businesses taking it up, and then it was too late.

Somebody, somewhere dropped the ball on this.
THe US should be using .us and the UK should actually be using .uk - both are shorter and easier to type and recall.
Too late now...

 

[Shane]

It's weird how the .us has gone untouched. Do you guys think it'll ever catch on?

@katherine - I'm not sure I agree with your extension order. It seems to me its completely dependent on the websites subject. For example, .org is very popular and often times preferred for information based websites.

@4u - Have you noticed major use of other cctlds? I found many global brands use the .ca for their local presence while using the .com for their corporate site.

How do you guys think the new extensions will affect users trust/preference?

 

[Onward]

I don't think the extension correlates with their success. If any of those businesses used a .co they'd still be wildly successful.

Then why even bother with a .net? just go with .ws and call it the day.

 

[dcristo]

You were saying you don't think there is a lack of trust associated with the .us just a lack of developed websites. Would you enter your personal information? I would never enter my credit card information on a cctld. I don't trust websites built on those extensions regardless of perceived quality.

Yes I would, as would millions of others. ccTLD is like the .com for locals.

 

[4u-domains]

It's weird how the .us has gone untouched. Do you guys think it'll ever catch on?

@katherine - I'm not sure I agree with your extension order. It seems to me its completely dependent on the websites subject. For example, .org is very popular and often times preferred for information based websites.

@4u - Have you noticed major use of other cctlds? I found many global brands use the .ca for their local presence while using the .com for their corporate site.

How do you guys think the new extensions will affect users trust/preference?

I dont think things will ever change now. The .us will never catch on 'enough' to help our .us portfolio..
The UK will use .co.uk and .com , Germany will use .de, the USA will use .com.
Other ccTLDs are great for their own country.

I am not a fan of the wacky TLDs out there. Call me cynical but it all looks like a marketing angle to get more money from the likes of us. The only ones I see working are where the TLD suffixes the domain beautifully, such as golf.pro .
Sure, a huge company can use one of these TLDs in a global marketing campaign on TV but it will not affect the rest of us.

Take .TV .... I see a lot of companies who have a .com or .co.uk as their website TLD create a TV Advert and cite xxxxxx.tv at the end.
This is fine for them, and works perfectly for their campaign. It will and has affected the premium .tv names. However, never in my life have I ever typed in a xxxxxxx.tv domain name.

 

[4u-domains]

Then why even bother with a .net? just go with .ws and call it the day.

I think those TLDs come down to marketing. However, marketing campaigns come to and end, and then one is left with a less than satisfactory online identity.

If I had a $500,000 marketing budget for a new product called Slick Hair Shampoo then if slickhairshampoo.com was taken by a speculator priced at $50,000 then I would rather buy that domain and then spend $450,000 marketing slickhairshampoo.com than spending $500,000 on slickhairshampoo.net and then worry for the next 10 years that I should have got the .com

Thats just an example and not a good one really but the priciple is clear.

 

[4u-domains]

Our company actually creates websites and online presence for small to medium sized local businesses (think State or County).

The right domain and TLD is always the first thing that is discussed.

A typical scenario is this:

Customer's actual business name is Alan Richards and Sons Limited, and their business is window cleaning.
They typically have a crappy website supplied by an sutomated site builder offered by their registrar and it would almost certainly resemble something like alanrichardslimited.co.uk

Once their target area or areas is worked out I would then offer up a suggestion to base the domain name on their product or service, related to that area.

For example, in this case, if they are based in London, I would suggest Londonwindowcleaning.co.uk .
This domain would naturally do well in the search engines, do well for recall on local offline marketing and really help make it obvious what they do for any online or offline prospect.

If they did not like the informal nature of this type of domain then I would suggest meeting in the middle and go fo Richardswindowcleaning.co.uk, or similar.

If the .co.uk had gone, then I would suggest the .com. If both had gone I would come up with another name suggestion that is available unless they now had heart on it (these meetings are very dynamic... :] ) in which case I would 'fall back' to the .net or some other variant of the ccTLD of which there are a few in the UK.

I would then build the site optimized for the service and areas that they wish to operate in.

I would concentrate their Google Adwords campaigns on the power of its local search.

Any marketing done now or in the future, on this strategy would likely not be wasted.