Do I think legacy TLDs (Dot Info, Dot Biz and so on) will be affected by new gTLDs in a negative manner? Yes, I do.
Do I think legacy TLDs will be affected by new gTLDs in a positive manner? Yes, I do.
Now that everyone’s confused, it’s time to explain why my answer to both questions was “yes” and try to put things in perspective.
There are two main dimensions we should be aware of: reseller market (domainer to domainer) sales on the one hand and end user sales on the other.
Let’s start with the effect of new gTLDs on legacy TLD reseller market prices. I’m reasonably confident the effect will be negative and that’s putting it mildly. There’s only so much money on the “domainer to domainer” market and quite frankly, if you have liquidity-related complaints when it comes to new or legacy TLDs at this point, I’m pretty sure you’ll be disappointed or even downright shocked a few years from now.
When it comes to end user sales though, the situation is completely different and the huge number of new gTLDs might actually be an advantage. If (and, granted, that’s a big if) awareness is gradually generated, a *lot* of money will be flowing in the direction of new as well as legacy TLDs. A lot of the legacy TLDs are actually not bad at all compared to most new gTLDs (dot info is short and catchy, dot biz is short and a bit tacky but still highly memorable and so on), so they may very well be on the receiving end if people/companies gradually start embracing dot com/net/org alternatives.
All in all, that’s the way I see things: from a reseller market perspective, I doubt legacy TLDs and most new gTLDs will have a bright future but from an end user perspective, we might just be pleasantly surprised.
August 30th, 2014 at 7:05 pm
Very interesting take, and I agree too. If the gTLDs create a trend of looking at both a domain name and its extension to make a meaningful pair, then the same can be felt in the existing gTLDs. Examples are mortgage.info, money.biz, sports.tv. They all make sense, so they are valuable.
August 30th, 2014 at 8:34 pm
I believe that meaningful .COM domains of any length will continue do well, but I suspect “legacy” TLDs of two words or more that the public is already aware of — and views as inferior to .COM, may be in for a tough time. In fact, with a portfolio consisting primarily of .COM, .NET, .ORG and .PRO domains, I’ve found that .COM and .PRO attract the most interest. My .COM, .NET and .ORG domains consist largely of two, three and four keywords, and were registered beginning in 2003, so I missed the “Gold Rush” days of the 1990’s. However, my .PRO portfolio is chalk full of short, single word category killers. Based on recent .PRO inquiries, it’s my impression that most end users are seeing .PRO for the very first time. And despite .PRO criticism I hear from domainers, .PRO resonates with end users. While .PRO is certainly NOWHERE NEAR as popular as .COM (virtually NO prior awareness from end users), it is also NOT viewed as subordinate or inferior. In addition, compare across the board annual .PRO renewals of $15.00 (even for domains like SMART.PRO) against any of the new gTLDs! And while domainers complain about .PRO restrictions, that’s likely not going to be an issue for actual end users because the .PRO domains they purchase are directly related to the businesses they own or run. I’m not actively engaged in selling my domains (several development projects in the works), but .COM and .PRO inquiries continue to trickle in from leads generated through listings on domain reseller sites. As for my .NET and .ORG domains, not so much. I’m letting them drop in ever increasing numbers.
August 30th, 2014 at 9:57 pm
I believe new TLD marketing could raise awareness of domain names in general but there will still be hesitancy to pay premium prices for new TLDs. Goodness, I stil find hesitancy among end users in 2014 to pay high $XXX to low $XXXX for relevant .COMs or one-word .TVs. Good luck to anyone trying to market new TLDs for $XXXX…