IMHO a dot-com is the ONLY tld to consider. How can you advertise anything else? When people see or hear a web site name they automaticaly think "dot com". It's what the Internet has always been about - references to 'the dot com boom', 'a dot com company' etc. It's like the diff between a 1-800-NUMBER and all the other toll free numbers - 866, 877, etc. When people hear a toll free phone number they think of 1-800 - they don't even hear the other toll free prefixes. Stick with .com - it's what the Internet is about!

Theres a whole world outside of america...

If only it was as simple a choosing a dot com
Why is there a .net at number 5 on the Alexa list of top web sites?
Even .com.au gets a run at number 85
http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sit...e=lang&lang=en

Originally posted by netau
[B]If only it was as simple a choosing a dot com
Why is there a .net at number 5 on the Alexa list of top web sites?

Because of heavy marketing and redirection of the .com. Would be a big mistake to develop a .net without the .com.

Originally posted by snoopy
Because of heavy marketing and redirection of the .com. Would be a big mistake to develop a .net without the .com.

Says the biased .comer

... because we all KNOW nothing ever changes in the world of computers and the internet.

Just like everyone knew IBM would wipe Microsoft's garage-based software operation off the map in the 1980's.

And everyone knew a start-up like Google didn't have a prayer against Yahoo, AOL, Excite, Lycos, and the others a few years ago.

And even now, people bet their life savings on interest-only mortgages because the agents tells them 'real estate prices only go up'...

Yeah, nothing changes...

Old ground, but nothing has ever changed just for the sake of it - has always been due to the replacement offering an improvement the original didn't offer.

Originally posted by safesys
Old ground, but nothing has ever changed just for the sake of it - has always been due to the replacement offering an improvement the original didn't offer.

Agreed.

Like the KEYWORD.com being priced at $x,xxx,xxx
and the same KEYWORD.info being priced at $x,xxx

Like the KEYWORD.com being priced at $x,xxx,xxx
and the same KEYWORD.info being priced at $x,xxx

The cost price is a very small part of the cost/benefit equation and is certainly not enough for a step change.

Theres a reason the .com costs more: demand, and that demand is from the massive nucleus of usage and recognition.

Originally posted by safesys
The cost price is a very small part of the cost/benefit equation and is certainly not enough for a step change.

Theres a reason the .com costs more: demand, and that demand is from the massive nucleus of usage and recognition.

True, but for many small businesses the cost of a keyword .com is prohibitive, making the equation academic. First and foremost they have to remain within their budget and that IMO is what is driving increases in good new TLD domain prices this year (and I expect will continue to drive them as long as the .com engine keeps pulling the whole train up the hill).

I expect will continue to drive them as long as the .com engine keeps pulling the whole train up the hill

Agree, I was talking in the context of a change of engine just because there are alternative carriages available.

When I hear good news/sales for " other than .com " TLDs mainly the usual suspects : .info .biz ..de .co.uk (and the late .us) ... I can only think of good/better news for dot com , and viceversa ( to some extent ) good news/sales in the dot com arena can only mean good uplifting news for the equivalent premium .info. .biz etc etc

Originally posted by Duke of Earl
True, but for many small businesses the cost of a keyword .com is prohibitive, making the equation academic. First and foremost they have to remain within their budget and that IMO is what is driving increases in good new TLD domain prices this year (and I expect will continue to drive them as long as the .com engine keeps pulling the whole train up the hill).

Wouldn't they be more likely to buy a cheaper .com instead of a new extension?

I think .biz and .us look cheap/junk'ish is to most people, no? And then they still have to deal with losing traffic to the .com. I think most people hear .biz and didn't even know it was an extension.

Not to insult people who own a lot of non-.com's, but I think it will take a very long time before non-.com is accepted in the general public....except for ccTLD's where it makes sense or some .org's.

Originally posted by jelly
Wouldn't they be more likely to buy a cheaper .com instead of a new extension?

Some would and some wouldn't. The ones who wouldn't have made dealing in new extensions very profitable for me. (Then there is the obvious point that when a one-word keyword is involved or a 3-letter acronym there are no cheaper .com versions to even consider. Those are all one of a kind).

Originally posted by jelly
I think .biz and .us look cheap/junk'ish is to most people, no?

Is this a trick question? The obvious answer is yes, you think .biz and .us look cheap/junkish to most people. Those who do not think it looks cheap/junkish buy them.

Originally posted by jelly
And then they still have to deal with losing traffic to the .com.

Most small business owners have absolutely no clue that leakage is an issue.

Originally posted by jelly
I think most people hear .biz and didn't even know it was an extension. Not to insult people who own a lot of non-.com's, but I think it will take a very long time before non-.com is accepted in the general public

If you are in the business of buying something and selling it for a profit, universal public acceptance is immaterial. The only thing that matters is whether or not there are enough buyers for your product to allow you to earn a worthwhile profit. In my case (and I know of many others) there have been more than enough .us/.biz/.info buyers to make it worth my while (and it gets more worthwhile with every passing month).

Most small business owners have absolutely no clue that leakage is an issue.

They don't think in terms of leakage, but they come at it from the other end - recognition.

bleed/leakage is a symptom of recognition issues - the majority of entities that choose a non-com/strong cctld would know they're going for something less obvious and they weigh that against the lower cost.

It's a compromise - and theres nothing wrong with that. People make compromises every day in their choices and many businesses do just fine catering to those compromises.

This applies as much to alternative com's as to alternative tld's.