.US inevitability

[218]

Originally posted by safesys
Yeah, they used the "ISO 3166-1 alpha-2" codes - although they did deviate from it for .uk which should have been .gb"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1

Was there a reason for this? What's .gb doing now, just exisiting in an idle state?

[trader]

Originally posted by 218
.......I stopped buying .us, have been liquidating some, and holding the ones that have good keywords.

If I had to choose between org and us I'd choose org anyday. Did you ever notice when you search for a name thats even halfway decent, almost all extensions are gone except for .us, .biz, .ws and .name

I suspect it's no coincidence.

ditto.

I also believe org will be the least negatively impacted of all the major extensions by the new unlimited tld's.


edit to fix typo

[218]

Yea one of the reasons I like .org is because I tend to think it's the least likely extension to be accidently typed with .com when recalling the address.

[trader]

Originally posted by 218
Yea one of the reasons I like .org is because I tend to think it's the least likely extension to be accidently typed with .com when recalling the address.

Why is that good? Is spillover traffic negative?

I am probably misunderstanding you so could you please explain that because I am operating under the assumption it is the 2nd most popular TYPEIN behind .com plus depending to a degree on the categories can get spillover traffic too.

Having a lot of org and looking at a lot of stats usually confirms org's gets respectable levels of typeins. Org also appears to me to be the second most common ext used in the media. In fact, if you listen to nationwide Public Radio programs you will hear org sites mentioned or advertised more than com. Org websites also often appear on my local tv stations.

[218]

I'm saying I think people are less likely to hear example.org and mistakenly type example.com as oppossed to the other extensions. Absolutely no way to prove it, just a theory.

[trader]

Sorry I thought maybe you meant a different reverse kind of aspect.

Thanks for making and clarifying that excellent point (which I never thought about before).

I absolutely agree it with and it's one of the reasons org's are so good.

[question]

Originally posted by 218
I think I comprehend the powerset search engine technique, but that will only really apply to developed sites. We all know the future of ppc is uncertain, as is everything.

Are you suggesting that eventually the type in as we know it will become irrelevant and or completely disappear because of an all powerful search engine?

If ppc is largely the product of search inefficiencies and .com being the de facto catch all, then better and more search, ICANN, the emphasis on local development and ccTLDs and smarter users should all affect this for instance.

Also on ppc, after I've guessed and gone to an ad-filled site, aren’t I less likely to guess and type in the next time, and more likely to search? Humans adapt though many debate this. So the eventual decline of the ppc game is maybe built into it, though it's a great game.

[218]

That's another mystery. I've found in some cases customers repeat visit ppc pages because that's how they remember to get to the page where they ultimately made a purchase.

[question]

I hear you, though I would have thought a majority of clicks always relates to people seeking info generally as opposed to direct purchase.

[question]

Here's some current comment on ccTLDs and .US specifically:
http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/low...s/08-19-08.htm

"It is becoming more and more about "local" on the web so as an American, if I cannot get the term I want in .com, I now lean toward .us over .net .. or other options.

In most countries outside the US, web surfers look to their local ccTLD first because they want to deal with someone from their country .. There is also an aspect of national pride there that ccTLDs benefit from.

To a large degree, despite our cultural and linguistic differences, people around the world are the same, so I think Americans - when forced to look for an alternative to .com due to the expense of names in the gold standard extension - will increasingly give serious consideration to their .us extension."

[snoopy]

Originally posted by question


To a large degree, despite our cultural and linguistic differences, people around the world are the same, so I think Americans - when forced to look for an alternative to .com due to the expense of names in the gold standard extension - will increasingly give serious consideration to their .us extension."

At the end of the day it just isn't how it is. .com prices vary for $7 to millions. People don't get outpriced from an extension, they get outpriced on specific names. When that happens most of the time they simply go for a weaker term.

[oldtimer]

Domainers and end-users are beginning to realize that they can get much better quality keywords in .US than they could in the traditional extensions.

I got these a couple of days ago myself:

NycJobs.us
NycRealEstate.us
LowCostInsurance.us

[snoopy]

Originally posted by oldtimer
Domainers and end-users are beginning to realize that they can get much better quality keywords in .US than they could in the traditional extensions.

Beginning? Surely it is obvious to anyone (especially domainers) that they can get a better quality keyword if they go for a less popular extension?

[oldtimer]

Maybe less popular now, but its not going to stay like that forever as more and more people (including domainers) continue to find out about the long term potentials of ccTLDs especially the ones for major Countries such as .US .

[carlton]

.US was the highest domain sale in the San Jose auction. That may be a first. Ron's timing not bad.