events It's bad. No worse. It's sad.

[betthelot]

OK imagine you run a domain business and you sell $7.9 million dollars a year worth of domains but it costs you $18 million dollars to operate the business.
What would you do?
Well MMX owners of such names as .work .beer .london .boston decided to pay the CEO $1.1 million and stop outbound sales.
Did you hear that guys, the main stream bloggers will not pick that up THEY STOPPED OUTBOUND SALES OF PREMIUM NAMES.
They had 13 sales people whose only job was selling premium names in 2015 and it didn't work. These sales people could negotiate the price given they own them and had millions to choose from, a big advantage but it was not financially viable; endusers were not interested.
So a $10million operating loss. They are one of the biggest pure play new gTLDs company and they are hurting like many of them. Will be sold for cents on the dollar within 2 years. Their only hope is .vip launches next month in China.
Invested? Strong sell.
Announced today by the CFO reporting 2015 audited accounts to the London Stock Exchange

 

[betthelot]

I don't get how they are spending $12-18 million a year? Advertising? Hookers and blow?

What's the annual recurring license cost for a tld? The server/network cost can't be very much. ( I used to work IT - I know dev cost <=> backups and maintenance.)

There is annual fee paid to ICANN $25k per string plus 0.18 cents for every name regged. Maybe slightly different but that's in the ball park. Plus they pay a licensing fee to the owners of .London to run that string. Most of the 18 million is wages followed by advertising marketing. The BOD are doing very well thankyou very much.

 

[betthelot]

betthelot - any reason you felt the need to post yet ANOTHER thread bashing new extensions? That's pretty much all you write about.
I agree with you for the most part but I start to wonder what's your agenda? - why the fixation on this particular topic?
Or maybe we should start asking - who do you work for?

Self employed. So working for no one except the wife Just interested in how the new gTLDs have played out and the lack of response from the main bloggers due to all of them being nearly 100% sponsored by them.
Clearly what I write has some interest, weight otherwise I would not get all these conspiracy theories.

 

[bobbarato]

plus 0.18 cents

Just 1/5 of a cent? Seems rather un-ICANNish. 18 cents?


Also if anyone else was wondering, I think BOD stands for board of directors.

 

[betthelot]

Just 1/5 of a cent? Seems rather un-ICANNish. 18 cents?

Well spotted. Yeah you are right $0.18 is the correct way of expressing it. Bit careless of me

 

[Kate]

I think after 50 years i.e. around 2065 AD when the present population of 7.5 billion reaches around 12-15 billion people and I assume out of that around 8-10 billion will be online at that time than all these extensions will be hugely popular because sheer volume of people browsing the Internet.

People don't need domain names to access the Internet, they just need IP addresses. Few people want to own a domain name, unless it's for business.
So the market size right now isn't 7 billion people. It's much smaller than that.

Of course the registries have always overestimated demand. The domainers also make the same mistake of overestimating the demand from end users for aftermarket domains. The industry is smaller than we perceive. The reported sales are testimony to that. Assuming reported sales are the tip of the iceberg (they are) and that the total amount of sales is say, 10 times higher - the percentage of aftermarket-worthy domains is still very low and it is concentrated in mainstream extensions. The share of alt extensions is absolutely marginal.

#lottery
#foolsgold

 

[garptrader]

VeriSign just reported and commented on a 73.3% Q4 2015 renewal rate. I wonder what renewal rate we will see with new TLDs. I suspect new registrations for most nTLD strings will not compensate for year 1 attrition.

 

[betthelot]

Thanks mad409, for posting the link to DigitalLook. It clarifies many things.

Minds + Machines is making major business decisions and is going through restructuring processes. While these processes puts any company at risk to a loss, Minds + Machines is also trying to cover its losses to look good to investors. Many companies face a year where contracts that helped them rise become a burden on it.

There are many factors at play here. The company is also using its cash reserves to expand. In conclusion, all of these things are business tricks a to expand a company. You can't just extrapolate this information for domaining.

The first set of threads on gTLDs were a nice counterargument. But I'm afraid to say that it seems to be turning into misinformation and petty arguments.

Misinformation. I look at the raw data and make my own conclusions. I don't read the CEO blurb and think it must be true I read it knowing he is trying to sell me a glowing future just like he did in the previous years reports that have turned out not to be the new dawn he said it would be. Healthy scepticism not just regurgitating the propaganda

 

[Rick Ace]

Misinformation. I look at the raw data and make my own conclusions. I don't read the CEO blurb and think it must be true I read it knowing he is trying to sell me a glowing future just like he did in the previous years reports that have turned out not to be the new dawn he said it would be. Healthy scepticism not just regurtating the propaganda

There's a difference between healthy skepticism and drawing conclusions by twisting data. The latter is considered to be misinformation. You're taking an article written for a business context and putting it in the perspective of the domain market. With so much information about the company's actions and intentions missing from that article, you can't just use it to speak about the entire domain market.

Even the data you consider to be "raw" has actually been catered to a specific audience. There is a limit to how far you can make conclusions based on one company's losses and gains.

 

[betthelot]

There's a difference between healthy skepticism and drawing conclusions by twisting data. The latter is considered to be misinformation. You're taking an article written for a business context and putting it in the perspective of the domain market. With so much information about the company's actions and intentions missing from that article, you can't just use it to speak about the entire domain market.

Even the data you consider to be "raw" has actually been catered to a specific audience. There is a limit to how far you can make conclusions based on one company's losses and gains.

Based on watching them for two years and my predictions have been nearly right on the money. In May 2015 they said the would turn a profit in 2016. I said in mid 2015 that is not going to happen and did you note they make not projection of when they now expect to make a profit. That is quiet acceptance that they will not make one in 2016 and I think very highly unlikely to make profit in 2017.
I'm putting it in the context of the new gTLDs and their value.

 

[Rick Ace]

I'm not going to say you're predictions are far fetched. The renewals are going to be hard on some of these TLDs if they can't make a profit. But I don't agree with the way Mind + Machines has been used as an example. That company is going under restructuring and it has a huge cash reserve. There are a lot of factors involved in this loss, and it isn't just about domain sales.

 

[Aspiring Billionaire]

I'd say that the risk taken in their initial business model was admirable to say the least, in essence it could have gone either way (at these early stages at least).

It's too early to say for sure though, and this is why many (if not all) domainers have gTLD's ... no one knows with surety what the future holds.

I must say though, that because some gTLD's have sold thus far (and I only say some because I compare it to the many that exist) it clearly says that there is a market for it, adding to the fact that websites are already built on some of them.

Lastly, we cannot speculate the future of gTLD'd by only taking into account the negatives and ignoring the positives - the outcome simply wouldn't be accurate enough for us to make a proper decision? Even with positives added to the equation (and let's assume that they outweigh the negatives) it still doesn't mean that it will be a success ... because it's much too early to tell for sure.

IMO - Many experienced domainers have invested in gTLD's, and for me, that's a good-enough sign to follow suite - speaking as a newbie of course :D

 

[betthelot]

I'm not going to say you're predictions are far fetched. The renewals are going to be hard on some of these TLDs if they can't make a profit. But I don't agree with the way Mind + Machines has been used as an example. That company is going under restructuring and it has a huge cash reserve. There are a lot of factors involved in this loss, and it isn't just about domain sales.

The only reason I use them Rick is because they are a public company and are a pure new gTLD player and therefore you can look under the hood and see what's going on. Impossible with all the others as they are either private or have a mix of other activities in the business.

 

[betthelot]

I'd say that the risk taken in their initial business model was admirable to say the least, in essence it could have gone either way (at these early stages at least).

It's too early to say for sure though, and this is why many (if not all) domainers have gTLD's ... no one knows with surety what the future holds.

I must say though, that because some gTLD's have sold thus far (and I only say some because I compare it to the many that exist) it clearly says that there is a market for it, adding to the fact that websites are already built on some of them.

Lastly, we cannot speculate the future of gTLD'd by only taking into account the negatives and ignoring the positives - the outcome simply wouldn't be accurate enough for us to make a proper decision? Even with positives added to the equation (and let's assume that they outweigh the negatives) it still doesn't mean that it will be a success ... because it's much too early to tell for sure.

IMO - Many experienced domainers have invested in gTLD's, and for me, that's a good-enough sign to follow suite - speaking as a newbie of course :D

Love the handle.

 

[Aspiring Billionaire]

Love the handle.

Thanks betthelot, appreciate the acknowledgement - you must share the "statement's mindset" to have recognized it. Keep on posting ...

 

[Silentptnr]

Seems clear to me. If you don't see demand, or increased demand, likely result is failure. Period

It's simple supply and demand. There is hope, restructuring and all that. But no demand = failure or major losses.

 

[Silentptnr]

I have seen new businesses squander millions of dollars in just a couple of years. No money on advertising, no money on innovation. Desperate suits collecting big salaries. It's human nature.

And look, millions of dollars and not one ad. Not one event to speak of. No branding to speak of. No clever marketing. No real news, just blog content. Horrible really. At least .xyz has done a bit and .club made a splash...the rest might as well pack it up or hope for luck.

How about donating to charity for exposure and good will...Nothing. One thing is for sure, these companies will get what they deserve. Good or bad.

 

[Silentptnr]

For anyone who is not familiar with the TLD scene, here's the list of extensions....crazy, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains

 

[betthelot]

For anyone who is not familiar with the TLD scene, here's the list of extensions....crazy, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains

Hahaha. What we need is a second round of new gTLDs. Is anyone seriously thinking we need more of these spam infested junk names. Go .horse newly named .nag.

 

[Silentptnr]

Hahaha. What we need is a second round of new gTLDs. Is anyone seriously thinking we need more of these spam infested junk names. Go .horse newly named .nag.

Won't affect me either way I don't think. I just know that it's hard enough to sell .com domains, so I can't imagine how hard it is selling new gtlds. I wonder how the registries feel when they look at their reports:

Income: 0.00
Expenses: 5,000,000
Assets: .horse, .tattoo, .shoes, .rodeo
Liabilities: Our investors (forget them, they'll never see their money)

 

[DomainVP]

Oh come on there's been loads and loads of big sales and you know it.

Nobody said that there weren't valuable gTLDs, and some good sales. "Loads and loads," is an exaggeration at best.

The only value of these domains are as domain hacks for highly searched phrases. How many of those can be made? Not many.

The problem is that the sale of a few good names will not ever justify the operation of an entire registry.

Also the problem about some of these 'big sales' is that they were directly from the registry, some being sold at conventions as promotion with 5-10 year payment plans.

This was a non-issue when they launched, and here almost 2 years later... still pretty irrelevant, with registries trying to shuffle around resources to mitigate losses.

 

[Asfas1000]

If outsourcing was the solution to M&M's problems, they would have gone for it from the set out...

 

[Silentptnr]

Average people barely know .co, .info, and .biz.. Imagine how long till they know .whoknowswhat.

I just think that odds are, it will take a long long time, if ever, for new tlds to take off.. Now, with all the premium pricing its even crazier.

What business has very few customers, keeps expensive infrastructure, but raises prices 1000%?

Usually I see that pattern in companies that are in the nfl (not for long) club.

 

[dordomai]

For anyone who is not familiar with the TLD scene, here's the list of extensions....crazy, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains

The market can't simply support that many extensions. If you increase the supply without increasing demand, the price has to decrease. Most gTLD were never worth much now you have 1000x more. Who is going to buy these?

The nGTLD had this cute idea that if they launched a niche extension, businesses and people from that niche would come and build websites on them. It wasn't a bad idea but IMO they were overly optimistic.

 

[Wannabean]

Nobody said that there weren't valuable gTLDs, and some good sales. "Loads and loads," is an exaggeration at best.

The only value of these domains are as domain hacks for highly searched phrases. How many of those can be made? Not many.

The problem is that the sale of a few good names will not ever justify the operation of an entire registry.

Also the problem about some of these 'big sales' is that they were directly from the registry, some being sold at conventions as promotion with 5-10 year payment plans.

This was a non-issue when they launched, and here almost 2 years later... still pretty irrelevant, with registries trying to shuffle around resources to mitigate losses.

Well .club alone has a lot of big sales so I don't think I'm exaggerating too much. I agree with everything else you say.

The name space was expanded 20 fold in the space of a few years. If housing was built at that rate, even if it was heavily discounted, most of it would be vacant. So I'm not sure what people were expecting. For me, this doesn't mean new g's are a failure, just you need to have really good ones if you wanna even entertain the thought of a sale anytime soon.

 

[dordomai]

If outsourcing was the solution to M&M's problems, they would have gone for it from the set out...

I think they were overly optimistic and thought they didn't need to.