Reveal day-which dntrade member applied for a new TLD?
- Thread starter Honan
- Start date
James
Top Contributor
look at the list here, it shows people from Australia who have made an aplication for the new TLD -
http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/application-results/strings-1200utc-13jun12-en
Google has mad 101 applications -
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2184179/Google-Pays-18.6-Million-Applying-for-101-New-gTLDs
http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/application-results/strings-1200utc-13jun12-en
Google has mad 101 applications -
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2184179/Google-Pays-18.6-Million-Applying-for-101-New-gTLDs
James
Top Contributor
I mad a quick image of the Australian buyers here, to cut down work for you all
http://jamesnorquay.com/which-australian-companies-have-applied-for-the-new-gtld-find-out-here/
Kind Regards,
http://jamesnorquay.com/which-australian-companies-have-applied-for-the-new-gtld-find-out-here/
Kind Regards,
Nice one James!
So pretty much all big brands.
What about .movie, .ceo, .book - guess these are speculators (ie planning to sell domains)
Nice infographic from Pool too:
http://www.domainnamenews.com/new-g...-gtlds-here-is-the-key-data-infographic/11721
So pretty much all big brands.
What about .movie, .ceo, .book - guess these are speculators (ie planning to sell domains)
Nice infographic from Pool too:
http://www.domainnamenews.com/new-g...-gtlds-here-is-the-key-data-infographic/11721
payattention
Archived Member
Thanks for putting that together James.
I'm disappointed to see Webjet (I hold) on the list. I can never get a response from the CEO Richard Noon (let's see if he's using Google Alerts) regarding their SEO strategy. Seems like an utter waste of money and I wonder if it's their intention to move the existing sites to .webjet (that would be a mistake IMO).
Devils advocate -what's the angle here for a company like Webjet? I've had a bit of a think and perhaps it's just a bit of PR. Flight Centre and Wotif are both absent from the list and perhaps it's an opportunity for Webjet to look like trendsetters, tech savvy or whatever. Perhaps it'll have a positive affect on the shares. The perception alone could potentially be worth the money even if they have zero intention of actually using the extension.
I'm disappointed to see Webjet (I hold) on the list. I can never get a response from the CEO Richard Noon (let's see if he's using Google Alerts) regarding their SEO strategy. Seems like an utter waste of money and I wonder if it's their intention to move the existing sites to .webjet (that would be a mistake IMO).
Devils advocate -what's the angle here for a company like Webjet? I've had a bit of a think and perhaps it's just a bit of PR. Flight Centre and Wotif are both absent from the list and perhaps it's an opportunity for Webjet to look like trendsetters, tech savvy or whatever. Perhaps it'll have a positive affect on the shares. The perception alone could potentially be worth the money even if they have zero intention of actually using the extension.
Honan
Top Contributor
Shaded to the winning post by the post office's stupidity of wasting the stamp collection cash on .AUSPOST
Really, dot aupost? What is the logic behind that?
At least the yellow pages are global
snoopy
Top Contributor
Shareholders could care less about something like that, it is about as exciting & earth changing as them sponsoring ten pin bowling.
snoopy
Top Contributor
Didn't see that one, I'd say it is even worse, because at least Telstra isn't using public money and the shareholders can decide to "opt out" of the company.
helloworld
Top Contributor
payattention
Archived Member
I don't care less but I'm biased as I have an interest in domains. I still think it's a waste of money but not much in the scheme of how much company's waste.
Bit more information I dug up.
and
helloworld
Top Contributor
Actually on that note, check my blog above as I mention NAB and have a quote from them in a similar vein.
snoopy
Top Contributor
My bet would be if they do change to it they'll change back when they see the level of confusion. I don't think this solves any issues with trademarks really. If webjet has a presence in china people will still be going to webjet.com.cn, china.webjet or cn.webjet will never be a natural fit. Not much point controlling a desert.
payattention
Archived Member
I guess the cost of the extension isn't really a big deal but rather the problems it'll create further down the line might cost them more in lost business.
If I want to book a flight to Bali (or anywhere else for that matter), I go to webjet.com.au but if they launch bali.webjet, will I be redirected there? Will they advertise the URL and lose traffic from people going to bali.webjet.com.au if they fail to setup a subdomain or redirect. Will people begin to use destination + brand search phrases more and more? Flight Centre are currently bidding on "bali webjet" and that could result in Flight Centre (wonder if webjet even know) getting more PPC clicks. Just look how many people google facebook.com instead of typing it into the address bar.
As for the China example - if they launched beijing.webjet, I'm guessing whoever owns webjet.com.cn will simply add the subdomain beijing.webjet.com.cn which would probably get a little traffic in the confusion.
If I want to book a flight to Bali (or anywhere else for that matter), I go to webjet.com.au but if they launch bali.webjet, will I be redirected there? Will they advertise the URL and lose traffic from people going to bali.webjet.com.au if they fail to setup a subdomain or redirect. Will people begin to use destination + brand search phrases more and more? Flight Centre are currently bidding on "bali webjet" and that could result in Flight Centre (wonder if webjet even know) getting more PPC clicks. Just look how many people google facebook.com instead of typing it into the address bar.
As for the China example - if they launched beijing.webjet, I'm guessing whoever owns webjet.com.cn will simply add the subdomain beijing.webjet.com.cn which would probably get a little traffic in the confusion.
