.CO extension ... will it be big or flop?

[maxime]

Originally posted by stateofwash
Can I ask a question about your statement above? Has every "new extension" that has ever come out failed?

Hi.

It all depends what you call a failure. The most successful one is probably the .INFO with now 5.5 millions names, but mostly grown on the back of free registrations.

For your reference .ORG has 8M registered names and .NET 12.5M.

To put things in perspective, keep in mind the .INFO was created in 2001.

At one time .NET and .ORG were new extensions right?

No. They are part of the initial set of 6 generic extensions so were launched at the same time as .COM (the other 3 original extensions are EDU GOV and MIL).

Regards,

[stateofwash]

Again, thanks to you all for your input. Very informative. Can I ask you opinion on something. If you could choose any domain name you wanted, but could only choose one ... what is your opinion on the most Premium word/domain out there? Gold.co? Health.co? What would you go after?

[VirtualT]

People don't get rich by following the masses, if you believe the extension could do well then speculate some funds into it, simple.

[maxime]

Originally posted by stateofwash
what is your opinion on the most Premium word/domain out there? Gold.co? Health.co?

Hi,

Just look at a table with the 20 most expensive domain names. The domains are likely to be adult, business or games related.

Regards,

[snicksnack]

.CO is a nice extension. It is not only brandable, but the domains come with type in traffic. Considering that the GA price is less than $25, it is worth going after these domains.

[snoopy]

.CO is a nice extension. It is not only brandable, but the domains come with type in traffic. Considering that the GA price is less than $25, it is worth going after these domains.

I don't see how there is any chance of making a brand of these, they are confusing as opposed to brandable, which is the appeal in the first place (typos).

[carlton]

Now I understand .ws - .biz - .info - .us all are quite worthless.

Whoever told you this is an idiot and/or conveying their own failure as a domainer. And .ws is not on par with us/biz/info each of which are several plateaus above .ws in registration numbers and actual use.

.co is a pretty sizable gamble. It might generate an initial wave of interest and possibly catch on a bit if the general public make the connection in .co = COmpany or COrporation. That is the gamble. The marketing has been aggressive and .co is likely to at least catch fire a little with early domainer fever not unlike .me and .mobi.

The typo benefit tied to .com is a viable angle for the best keywords.

[snicksnack]

I don't see how there is any chance of making a brand of these, they are confusing as opposed to brandable, which is the appeal in the first place (typos).

There might be some confusion, but as the registry is marketing the extnesion heavily it might settle in peoples mind that .CO stands for COmpany.... This of course will not happen overnight and it will not ever replace .COM.

I wouldn't personally build a business on .CO unless I would target the local market or I would own the .COM as well, but I strongly believe that is is an extension not to be missed and if only for the type in traffic.

[domainica]

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what kind of leakage a .co would expect from its namesake .com?

Or, in other words, what percentage of visitors would type .co instead of .com?

[snicksnack]

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what kind of leakage a .co would expect from its namesake .com?

Or, in other words, what percentage of visitors would type .co instead of .com?

depends very much on the sort of domain and where it gets it traffic from. Is most of the traffic from ads or backlinks or type in....

anyway, a domain like google.co would get around 60k-80k visitors a day and facebook .co around 40k-50K, but this is just my estimate

[snoopy]

There might be some confusion, but as the registry is marketing the extnesion heavily it might settle in peoples mind that .CO stands for COmpany.... This of course will not happen overnight and it will not ever replace .COM.

The only people they'll convince of that is domainers, (which look to be who the registry is mainly targeting, ie sponsoring domain blogs and the like). To market this extension to the general public effectively would cost hundreds of millions in my view. I can't follow at all that some domainers are seriously talking about developing these names, makes no sense to me. 12-24 months time is going to be interesting, personally I think this is .mobi mk II.

[snicksnack]

.TV managed to convince people that it stands for Television and I believe most end users would have a clue that it is a ccTLD.

I think .mobi was crap to begin with, so is .tel. I see .co as a good extension. If the extension will make it in the long run as Company TLD, not sure, but it can be used to adress the local market or one can register it for the potential type in traffic, this is what I believe most people did.

[snoopy]

.TV managed to convince people that it stands for Television and I believe most end users would have a clue that it is a ccTLD.

The percentage of people who would choose to use a .tv domain is very low, we are talking fractions of 1% in my view. If the hope for .co is that it will be as popular as .tv, well I say it is unlikely, buy not impossible. If you look at the .tv aftermarket though, it has little activity and generally it has been a money pit for domainers over the last decade.

I think .mobi was crap to begin with, so is .tel. I see .co as a good extension. If the extension will make it in the long run as Company TLD, not sure, but it can be used to adress the local market or one can register it for the potential type in traffic, this is what I believe most people did.

Looking at stats like compete, alexa etc I think the typo potential is there, but for generics there is is going to bea tiny % that will really cover reg fees in my view. If you say most people registered for that reason, it makes no sense to me, because 300,000 names were registered. Unless the real site is getting thousands of type ins per day (ie not including SE traffic) I don't think it is going to to make sense most of the time.

[the_poet]

This article tries to answer your question: bit.ly/aLnZPI

Just out of curiousity, anyone know what kind of leakage a .co would expect from its namesake .com?

Or, in other words, what percentage of visitors would type .co instead of .com?

[Kyric]

So what was the verdict on .co in the end........ from what ive seen so far, the traffic was disappointing. My feeling is that because people are so practiced in typing .com, its an error they are less likely to make versus the name of the site typo errors.