.co Is .co a success?

[Zutroy]

I was wondering how the .co name is going? Is it looking like a success or a flop? My apologies for not been up to speed I haven’t been paying too much attention to the domain market of late.

Many thanks,

Zutroy

 

[jmcc]

Yes in terms of marketing.
No in terms of early market (first two years or so) development.
However it takes about five years for development trends to become established for a new TLD.

Regards...jmcc

 

[Zutroy]

So is it a respectable enough domain for serious website development? The only big site I knew of using it was o.co, but when I just went and checked only just it seems they are redirecting back to overstock.com, I take it they have had second thoughts, anyway if you found a name you liked would you be happy to develop a website you were serious about using a .co?

Many thanks,

Z

 

[DNNabber.com]

anyway if you found a name you liked would you be happy to develop a website you were serious about using a .co?

I would but it would have to be a very solid highly highly advantageous word or keyphrase.



Love,
Marcia

 

[bmugford]

The only big site I knew of using it was o.co, but when I just went and checked only just it seems they are redirecting back to overstock.com, I take it they have had second thoughts

O.co loses 61% of its traffic to O.com

anyway if you found a name you liked would you be happy to develop a website you were serious about using a .co?

I personally would not. Many people have never heard of .CO, so they assume it is a .COM.
It is confusing to the general public.

Brad

 

[Keith]

I was wondering how the .co name is going? Is it looking like a success or a flop?

It's just like any extention...for some investors it's a success and for others it's a flop. If we're talking about public awareness then I would deem it a flop thus far IMO.

 

[jmcc]

So is it a respectable enough domain for serious website development?

If you were targeting a global audience, had the equivalent .com and a large budget, yes.

If you are targeting a country level market other than Colombia, no. There's been a massive inward focus by developers targeting country level markets on the local ccTLD. Thus for a German market, .de is essential, for a UK market, .co.uk etc.

if you found a name you liked would you be happy to develop a website you were serious about using a .co?

Perhaps but it would be a struggle to get it recognised as .co recognition outside the US and perhaps domainers is low. The .co registry is marketing it well but in some countries, there really isn't much interest outside of domainers and the odd well branded site.

Regards...jmcc

 

[dezinerite]

Good question. I was one of those who scrambled to buy a few when it first came out. I then dropped the whole lot of them. I would say it's a FLOP in most part. The biggest issue I can think of is that most people who are sent a ".co" domain name to check out might think that the person had intended to write ".com" so they might visit the .com of the site.

It's great for URL shorteners or similar uses, e.g. no_url_shorteners for twitter. But to develop a brand that you believe in and then giving it the .co instead of the .com...I think that would be a very big mistake.

 

[jmcc]

It's great for URL shorteners or similar uses, e.g. no_url_shorteners for twitter.

I think that it was dangerous for .co registry to become associated with that because people don't actually remember URL shorteners. They are kind of like background noise. They make for great publicity but that's about it.

Regards...jmcc

 

[Tia Wood]

I think it's a somewhat of a success. I don't see end users or customers adapting to .co but I still think it has its purpose.

 

[Kate]

Glass half-full or half-empty.

• regular growth, 1M+ registrations (but it's only half of .biz volume)
• some aftermarket activity

but:

• little notable development (the key to awareness and recognition)
• will never be a major extension (imo) on par with established gTLDs, definitely not going to be a credible alternative to .com, just another alternate extension.

I think that the ccTLDs that are rebranded as gTLDs or 'global use' are going to have a hard time. They will be diluted in a myriad of new TLDs.
I have more faith in genuine ccTLDs (those that are used for what they were intended for).

 

[emjohn]

Depends how you define success. It doesn't need to compete with .com. If you have the very best keywords, why not develop on .co? But I would say that you should have a lot of money in the bank for extra marketing.

I think it would be interesting to find out how much leakage there is from Angel.co to Angel.com. Angel.co gets more traffic. BMugford, care to share your insights on the matter rather than pull up that "old" 61% thing. You make it sound as if that number will stay static til the end of eternity. That is just not the case. As more people know .co there will be be a decrease in that number. That's just how it is.

 

[lobo123]

I think that the fact that big registrars like GoDaddy promote the .co, then it has a chance...

 

[bmugford]

BMugford, care to share your insights on the matter rather than pull up that "old" 61% thing.

The OP asked what happened to Overstock using O.co. I posted a link to the article.

That is what Overstock said. If you don't like it go complain to them.

Brad

 

[emjohn]

No, I will complain to you for posting an old statistic.

The OP asked what happened to Overstock using O.co. I posted a link to the article.

That is what Overstock said. If you don't like it go complain to them.

Brad

 

[DU]

No, I will complain to you for posting an old statistic.

Until someone is willing to replace it with a new one it's all that exists in terms of stats (that I know of). Perhaps rather than just saying it's old you could indicate why you think the number would be less (as you suggested)? I can't think of any reason why it would changed.


In general, leakage would vary by method of getting visitors.

QR codes or direct links suffer 0% leakage.
TV ads on o.co cause 61% leakage.

It all depends on the intended business model.

Some would say a nice .co is worth the risk of developing and using ... If 95% of your clients are direct access then they're not likely to walk away because you're a .co or .anythingelse. If you're reliant on radio recall using a .co might not be good or wise.... if a competitor owns the .com its suicide

Success?
Yes and No and depends on who you ask.

 

[Kate]

If you have the very best keywords, why not develop on .co?

And who has got them ?
The very best keywords were bought or auctioned ($$$$$) and the supply is limited, it's not like the small guy could get the coveted keyword for reg fee, that is unavailable in other extension...

In America, to be taken seriously, it is expected that you will run your business on .com. .net/.can be acceptable, however .co is too confusing for the uneducated masses. It spoils your branding efforts. .co is okay for low-key development, but not for critical business imo.

In the rest of the world, or at least the developed Western hemisphere, the local extensions dominate. There it is expected that you will use the local extension, but .com will often be acceptable.

So there is not much room for anything in between. That's why the opportunities are limited in alt TLDs. Extensions such as .coop .jobs .mobi .aero .tel .biz suck but at least they don't look like typos of .com :blink:

 

[emjohn]

That's a bunch of behooey. If a new statistic doen't exist, too bad. But common sense tells me it will drop as more .co are registered. As more TLDs come out en mass, everyone will begin to realize that the right of the dot means something. As such, it will become more and more apparent what .co is. Therefore leakage will go down slowly. I would venture to guess the 61% is probably at around 55% now. But remember, this is only a statistic for ONE company. I'm more interested in knowing what the leakage is for Angel.co. If it is 25%, it throws the whole 61% bruhaha down the toilet.

And who has got them ?
The very best keywords were bought or auctioned ($$$$$) and the supply is limited, it's not like the small guy could get the coveted keyword for reg fee, that is unavailable in other extension...

In America, to be taken seriously, it is expected that you will run your business on .com. .net/.can be acceptable, however .co is too confusing for the uneducated masses. It spoils your branding efforts. .co is okay for low-key development, but not for critical business imo.

In the rest of the world, or at least the developed Western hemisphere, the local extensions dominate. There it is expected that you will use the local extension, but .com will often be acceptable.

So there is not much room for anything in between. That's why the opportunities are limited in alt TLDs. Extensions such as .coop .jobs .mobi .aero .tel .biz suck but at least they don't look like typos of .com :blink:

 

[Kate]

That's what I said the other day. .co sucks today but you can take comfort in the thought that it sucks a bit less with every passing day.

Sorry, but it's not good business.

Domainers should take their own medicine and run at least one critical website on a .co domain or whichever extension of the moment they like to pimp to "uneducated" end users. At least they would be taken more seriously. They would feel the pain too.

 

[JB Lions]

Leakage, leakage Eli. I take your traffic and drink it up. Eli = .co

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_hFTR6qyEo"]I Drink Your Milkshake! - There Will Be Blood (7/8) Movie CLIP (2007) HD - YouTube[/ame]

 

[freedom30]

...was gonna vote somewhat but there is no reason that .co isn't a success.

It's just gonna steamroll in the 21st century with the other extensions and produce a fair share of interest as the planet becomes more and more user friendly and businesses desire better names that .com can't supply as they are already taken or not cost-effective to purchase.

An atrophy of sorts in the form of parity is taking place for .com slowly but most assuredly with certainty and the younger generations are more familiar with the letters at the right of the dot and .com is not the "one true god" that the elders worshiped.

To the new generation, they are all basically the same...

 

[DU]

I would venture to guess the 61% is probably at around 55% now.

So making up numbers is an improvement on presenting old statistics?

You really are a strange one sometimes.

As such, it will become more and more apparent what .co is.

And what is it?

 

[JB Lions]

That's a bunch of behooey. If a new statistic doen't exist, too bad. But common sense tells me it will drop as more .co are registered. As more TLDs come out en mass, everyone will begin to realize that the right of the dot means something. As such, it will become more and more apparent what .co is. Therefore leakage will go down slowly. I would venture to guess the 61% is probably at around 55% now. But remember, this is only a statistic for ONE company. I'm more interested in knowing what the leakage is for Angel.co. If it is 25%, it throws the whole 61% bruhaha down the toilet.

As discussed before, 61%, 55%, 25% all horrible. Do you really think there is a business out there that would find those numbers acceptable? Every customer is valuable. Any confusion is bad. You're throwing 25% around like that's ok. Not to a real business.

 

[bmugford]

I would venture to guess the 61% is probably at around 55% now. But remember, this is only a statistic for ONE company. I'm more interested in knowing what the leakage is for Angel.co. If it is 25%, it throws the whole 61% bruhaha down the toilet.

Your comments remind me of a saying popularized by Adam Savage on Mythbusters -

"I reject your reality and substitute my own"

There was no .CO "end user" more heavily promoted than Overstock. They obviously spent more money in terms of domain acquisition and marketing that any other .CO advertiser.

When Overstock explains their experience with .CO it can't be ignored.

If you have new facts and figures please bring them to the table.

Brad

 

[emjohn]

Who is Adam Savage and who cares? Look Bud, life is changing all the time and so is the market. Nobody knows exactly what is going to happen and if you find someone who tells you the "truth" about what will happen, run the other way. That is just plain skullduggery. If you haven't come to that realization then you haven't tasted the breath of life. As .co becomes more pervasive, in small increments, the leakage will decrease, this is just common sense. Once again, I'd be interested to know Angel.co's leakage. THAT, would be interesting.

You don't have the "corner" on reality my friend. Numbers don't lie, but they change; that's why change is the greatest constant.

Your comments remind me of a saying popularized by Adam Savage on Mythbusters -

"I reject your reality and substitute my own"

There was no .CO "end user" more heavily promoted than Overstock. They obviously spent more money in terms of domain acquisition and marketing that any other .CO advertiser.

When Overstock explains their experience with .CO it can't be ignored.

If you have new facts and figures please bring them to the table.

Brad