Does anyone think that the new .ws extension will catch on to the point where it makes it worth it to purchase them for your company?

Do you know of anyone using them?

Thanks!
Anthony http://www.gorillahost.com

I don't really know. Maybe the 4+ letter ones since it's the same price as network solutions(The Dot Com.plicated People). However I think they're getting a bit greedy with $250 a year(2 year minimum payment) for 3 letter domain names. It's just a name! I know people have made tons off selling domains, but still... $500 for a name is waaay too much. $70 in my opinion is too much.

------------------
Justin K.
A pessimistic person sees the glass as half empty, optimistic half full... when in fact the glass is completely full. Partially with water and partially with air.

A lot of predictions have been made about computer related issues over the years, and many have been wrong. That said, I don't think the various country domains will catch on to the point where they become as commonplace as .com, .net and .org.

Look at the present situation as an example. Most domains in countries outside the U.S. still choose .com over their own country domain. That hasn't stopped various countries from marketing their country domains as an alternative if the domain you want has already been registered under the top 3 choices.

That's why we see .cc, .ws and others. I believe it's Modava/Moldavia that has the .md country domain. They have been selling registrations at a premium to doctors around the world.

IANA and ICANN are working on several changes in the registration system, from changes in the IP system to more TLD (top level domains). The additional TLDs will further reduce the chances of any of the country domains from really catching on. The role of country domains is likely to remain that of expressing country of origin (in most cases) rather than as an alternative to any of the top 3.

Of course, NSI and others will try to convince you otherwise and will gladly register your domain under various country domains, for a hefty price, especially considering yearly renewals.

Do as you like, but I wouldn't waste the money.

[This message has been edited by Duster (edited 07-27-2000).]

I agree with Duster. Another point to add is look at all the branding done with ".com". I would be reluctant to get a .ws unless I also have the .com because sooner or later (probably sooner) your potential customers will accidently, or even deliberatly, go to the .com anyway. And if they only remember the second level domain then you have lost them forever since they will assume ".com".

------------------
Chuck Fox
http://cfoxhost.com

I also would agree with Duster. To take it a step further, I would never (and advise my clients likewise) register a .net or .org name unless I also own the .com. If the .com isn't available, most likely it would be a competitor that owns it. So, if you decide to use .net, you'll be sending most people (who plug in .com by habit) to your competitor. This applies to the .ws and all the others as well. If you can't get a particular .com, think of another .com that is available.

------------------
--
Steve Wood
Wood Interactive <A HREF="http://www.woodinteractive.com
Red" TARGET=_blank>www.woodinteractive.com
Red</A> Hot Hosting www.redhothosting.com (http://www.redhothosting.com)

I only have one comment about this matter, dot com will always be the 800# of the internet...

Agreed... I have an 877 toll free number. Quick poll: how many of you don't realize that 877 is toll free?

For personal sites I guess it doesn't matter much, but I found myself typing .com in for communitech (for example). I don't register the .net's hoping that someone will register it, develop a popular site, and send hits my way :)

Totally agreed on all views. I can't see .ws becoming popular, despite all the hype that the marketing machines are putting into them (for example, have you noticed that most of them have said .ws stands for 'world site', when .ws has been an existing TLD for the last 5/6 years?)

[This message has been edited by BC (edited 07-27-2000).]