Birdie in The Mine DOA. We Now have a CAUSE of Death!

Morning Folks!!


It has been no secret where I stand with the O.co debacle. I have written extensively on the subject. No other subject has been covered closer by me in nearly 5 years of this blog. Why? Because this was important. Very important. This bit of information is huge and I said many times I would 'Hang my hat on it' before I even knew the results. This golden goose has given birth again. A complete set.


The DomainIncite article today and the quote from Patrick Byrne of Overstock.com says it all.


“O.co was my bad call” and that “about eight out of 13 people who were trying to visit us through O.co, eight were typing O.com”


8 out of 13 folks! Pay attention. These statements made by these folks are priceless and I thank them for it.


We finally know the other side of this famous statement and added together, that is the whole enchilada! A full and defined equation using the best of circumstances with MILLIONS of dollars thrown at it and a full result.


'Mr. Johnson said customers responded well to the O.co advertising, but after watching the spots, 'a good portion' of those who sought out the website went to O.com, instead of O.co.'


We now have a definition of 'Good Portion.' WOW!!!!!


According to the numbers that works out to 61%. 61%!!!! That is OFF the chart. Until now I had always believed that 50% would have been the high water mark. But 61% is much more devastating and that 61% will improve in time. To maybe 50% which is still DOA.


With all the evidence there was still debate disguised as hope. That hope is now DOA as well. The debate os OVER! What SCHMUCK wants to argue the FACT that if you use a .CO and lose 60% of your HARD WORK, advertising dollars, customers, sales, new customers, etc. etc. etc is worth doing? (or imo any other extension other than .com without owning the .com)


This should be a bar that every business not using a .com learns from. It may be invisible to them, but they are not leaking, they are hemorrhaging. Those that continue to close their eyes to the facts will continue to be SLAVES to people they don't even know. Like me and many of you!!


As they open up thousands of new avenues, I will enjoy the extra traffic and money and I wish them all the great success! I love you my brothers! Build empires.


Have a GREAT Day!

Rick Schwartz


P.S. Here are just a few of my .co articles because I have articulated just how important this result would be BEFORE we ever got a result. And with loads of ads and Superbowl advertising and it is still spitting in the wind. This is a huge blow to .whatever and just because there are many forces that will push back as they have $$$ on the table, it will not change the facts. The equation will only be slightly different with others.


Lastly, let me tip my hat to the folks at Overstock.com that had the GUTS to actually follow the numbers and not bury them like most would. They did a great service for all of us. They learned something and they shared it. Mr. Johnson, Mr. Byrne, you are stand up guys and you bared for all following your heart and how sometimes that collides with following the numbers.


Overstock did something on a grand scale, got a grand result and those that don't learn after all the dollars they have spent need to keep reading the following 2 statements until they do.


Imagine, not only pissing 61% of all somebody's business away, but in a similar scenario they could be pissing that traffic right into the mouths of their competition. Who after what Overstock has taught us would risk that now? SCHMUCKS!!! I mean this is as simple as it gets. A company could collapse over something like this. Luckily nothing was at O.com because had there been a competitor there, it would likely sting 1000 times as bad.


'Mr. Johnson said customers responded well to the O.co advertising, but after watching the spots, 'a good portion' of those who sought out the website went to O.com, instead of O.co.'



Patrick Byrne said


“O.co was my bad call” and that “about eight out of 13 people who were trying to visit us through O.co, eight were typing O.com”





January 23, 2011

http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/01/my-take-on-ocomi-mean-oco-and-other-new-extensions-and-their-fate.html


January 29, 2011


http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/01/will-any-co-stand-up-to-udrp-or-wipo-and-will-it-be-worth-defending.html


February 6, 2011


http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/02/coboom-or-bust-love-or-anger-confusing-the-confusion.html


May 11, 2011


http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/05/the-birdie-in-the-domain-mines-singing-or-dying.html


November 14, 2011


http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/11/the-birdie-in-the-mine-dead-at-just-11-months-of-age-now-what.html


http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/11/is-it-over-for-co-big-fanfare-turns-embarrassing-and-costly-with-oco-decision.html


November 18, 2011


http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/11/whatever-and-the-biggest-losers-.html


December 1, 2011


http://www.ricksblog.com/2011/12/mission-accomplished.html





76 thoughts on “Birdie in The Mine DOA. We Now have a CAUSE of Death!

  1. Danny Pryor

    Let me be the first to comment by saying I miss your regular posts. But as I read this morning somewhere, genius is found in simplicity and new ideas, not complex regurgitations of the old stuff.
    This is new, it is simple and it drives home a point. When you first wrote of the O.co debacle – I nearly typed”com” even now because it’s NATURAL TO DO SO – I found myself giving serious reconsideration to the entire TLD spectrum. What would matter more than a .com domain? Probably none of them. They are like vitamins for the meal: supplements.
    It’s great to see you writing. :)

    Reply
  2. adam

    You always said that… but somehow you registered about 2500 .co`s.
    I guess you underline that topic as you lost money investing in crappy .co names.
    Also, you are hoping to sell you shi.. .com`s for big $$$.
    New extensions are coming and .com will loose its position sooner or later.

    Reply
  3. ThemePremium

    Actually its pretty much commonsense to me that for some reason, if I want to start a business on a .co domain then I must also own the .com version of the domain and redirect it to .co. There is no other choice. But I guess common sense is very uncommon these days :)

    Reply
  4. Scott

    Seeing”Morning Folks!!” makes me happy. Personally, I don’t foresee a day anytime soon when consumers don’t automatically assume .com for the trailing TLD. Sure, there are great websites hosted on other extensions and always will be. But the majority of the web is .com for a reason. I think this will especially hold true if ICANN is actually allowed to follow through on the gTLDs (my doubts are still there that it will actually come to fruition – I sense a large legal battle coming their way). So say someone owns visit.america with .america being the gTLD. My bet is a majority of the traffic goes to VisitAmerica.com because it’s an automatic association for most consumers. As you’ve always said, dotCOM is king and always will be. The O.co debacle just strengthens that notion.

    Reply
  5. Rick Schwartz

    Yes, I registered 2500 .co domains BEFORE we had all this information. I am a speculator for god sakes!
    But once they proved to be FOOLS GOLD, I NEVER tried to sell a single one. I let most of them DROP!
    So please get your BS straight!

    Reply
  6. Paul J Kapschock

    I think this is just more ammo that .com is king.
    Great that Overstock gave insight into decision.
    I get a few domain requests per week and .COM is it!
    Nice call Rick.

    Reply
  7. Rob

    Only in America lol, over here in UK and Germany, we are more than capable of distinguishing extensions, hence why .de and .co.uk and more prevalent than dot com in my experience.

    Reply
  8. Rick Schwartz

    Rob,
    In other countries they have been trained to notice and even understand the difference. So you have already passed much of the learning curve. Here it is .com all day all night with a few .whatever’s sprinkled in. That said I think 12% of all .co registrations are from .co.uk owners and I think that is for good reason and an issue of the future with leakage.

    Reply
  9. .co troll

    But I thought that”.com is actually a typo of .co”
    I’m confused, perhaps somebody from the .co camp help clarify
    Juan, lori ann, elliot?
    Also wondering when this years .co awards are coming out
    Thanks

    Reply
  10. EmergingDomains

    Dot com is king in the US; elsewhere the ccTLD is big – national pride dictates! Also, dot tv is recognized somewhat as a global extension. I appreciate your insights!

    Reply
  11. Christopher

    Hilarious, defensive post. People want .co’s. Deal with it. I get inquiries almost every day now. If you kept yours instead of letting them drop maybe you would too. It was slow to get started but has really picked up recently. Not everyone can afford a primo .com an they don’t want pigeonshit.com so maybe they go with .co. You sound more shrill with every post, Rick.

    Reply
  12. Rick Schwartz

    Hey Schmuck,
    Why don’t you stick to the facts and address the 61% in lost traffic??
    I know it is much easier to ignore and sweep those facts under the rug.
    But it’s time to mash other peoples noses in FACTS even when they scream bloody murder.

    Reply
  13. Fero

    Develop only on .com if you want stable business ,ranking and traffic .
    Everything else is risky .

    Reply
  14. owen frager

    I don’t think this article/example is fair. This was a mistake in marketing strategy.
    They already had a name they spent millions in advertising and when we start talking instead of typing it’s easy to ask for Overstock. Problem is its too long for todays needs.
    However O.co on an iPhone app or social site button provides direct navigation and serves a purpose. Also good on the Stadium. As it would be for 136K app developers that have no home base behind the labels the put on apps which forward to ITunes where usually no one can find them.
    The LLLs are great for lawyers who establish an email chain with clients as I have with my .us
    As long as it stands on a bookmark, no one has to find it.
    Mike recently covered Flicker vs Flickr when the right spelling had a counter of the traffic loss. The fact is that happens everyday with misspells, .gov. .edu, .org- heck I can never remember where to pay my att bill- the .com is a sales page, the .net the portal for subscribers.
    It’s confusion that causes traffic loss. And today even more when people type urls into search bars instead of address bars- they ask for worksmarter.com and Google asks them”did you mean work-smarter.com”.
    There is application in the world for .co, .me and .TV but not applications where the name has to be remembered or typed.
    And it’s not just domains, the name must match Facebook page, twitter handle etc. And the only way to do that is with one of these extensions.
    I own Waikiki.me but I also own Waikikime.com and the Facebook match. Problem now is not the name but that the logo doesn’t fit in the Facebook or Twitter box. MTV.com should also be M.TV. MeetME.com stepped up to Meet.ME- we are seeing more of this
    But I have always said these are enduser plays and not the same expectation as with a .com and traffic.
    Demand Media who runs .TV registers in .com. Name Media, Frank Schilling etc- very few .co, .tv and he has advised against it in early blog posts.
    You can’t repeat Fank or Rick’s success by gambling on other extensions.

    Reply
  15. Dallen

    Rob
    I’m based in U.K. and when registering/buying a domain I always try to get the .com and .co.uk. I have maybe 100 combinations of a domain as a .com and .co.uk. I check my stats daily and can tell you that in my experience the dot com wins 2:1 every day.
    I think ccTLDs are great but unless you have the .com as well you will lose traffic.

    Reply
  16. BullS

    Why are people in so denial?
    How many times do I have to tell you…dot com is KING.
    dot whatever websites are full of”BULLS”

    Reply
  17. Marriane

    Interesting…when you type in O.com in google it shows Overstock.com in first place, organic serps.
    Looks like the branding had some effect or is Google doing them a favor.

    Reply
  18. Emma

    Dont mind Rick, he himself bought 2500 .co domain names for minimum $300 each, that is no less than $750000. And what is he talking about now???

    Reply
  19. Rick Schwartz

    Emma, put down the crack pipe and stop making stuff up.
    Looks like the hornets nest of know nothings has been rattled big time today. Love it!

    Reply
  20. Rick Schwartz

    For years I have had to live with the bullshit spewed at me by know nothings for discovering things early only to get vindicated by the FACTS later on. So when I have the facts on my side after eating shit for years, I get to stuff that shit back in the mouths of those little pricks. Not for disagreeing. I love the joust of examining all sides of an issue. But when the facts come in and the debate was low and personal and twisted, the joust is over. I will use those facts to destroy whatever agenda some may be protecting and the snake oil they sell.
    There are a number of non .com domain extensions that can be promoted and have great value. But if you do not own the .com counterpart, you are pissing away in excess of 50% of all your dollars spend AND if that .com counterpart is owned by a competitor, you are fueling your own demise. You are feeding the beast that wants to destroy you with your own hard work. It’s no longer a debatable issue. It is what they call”Settled.” That’s going to screw up the plans of many and they will lash out. They lash, I laugh.

    Reply
  21. Kevin

    The .com extension has achieved TENS OF TRILLIONS of capital investment and spending for branding, advertising, marketing, in every medium in every way imaginable worldwide.
    NO OTHER EXTENSION COMES CLOSE!
    So to keep it simple there are 2 basic investing strategies.
    If you want the safest long term investment in domains stay with .com!
    If you like high risk short term speculation then play with all the other extensions.

    Reply
  22. John

    Really not sure why there is even an argument here. .COM was first. .COM is what an entire country and Internet sector created back in the 90′s and spent countless dollars marketing. The only ones benefiting from all the other garbage extensions are the registrars that make money by selling as much product as possible. Once NASDAQ cracks 3000 and heads back up toward 5000 it’s going to be 1999 all over again. Apple will be the one leading the way being the first company with a Trillion Dollar marketcap. Priceline, Google, FaceBook soon and countless other Internet stocks all using .COM will just keep reinforcing it. .COM is where the liquidity is and no one else is going to be able to do marketing wise what has been done and will continue to be done by everyone using .COM

    Reply
  23. Jon

    And it gets much worse for .co and new tlds once you start thinking about lost emails. Imagine running a biz on .co or .nyc and losing 60% of incoming emails (that are not replies) to .com and nyc.com. The email issue alone make .co and new tlds worthless.

    Reply
  24. motts

    @John nailed it regarding .COM and the fact that almost all of the largest companies in America use one (some for almost 20 years now). Ignore this one simple yet important concept at your own peril.

    Reply
  25. EmergingDomains

    @ Owen said:”Mike recently covered Flicker vs Flickr when the right spelling had a counter of the traffic loss . . . It’s confusion that causes traffic loss.”
    @ Rick said:”There are a number of non .com domain extensions that can be promoted and have great value.”
    This is a good discussion. [This is what's it's about! :)] On that topic, this knownothing – it’s okay if you view me as a knownothing! :) – thought at the time you put Flowers.mobi up for auction, that it might have had a future after all, and you could still recover your investment, and posted that in comments.
    Now that 1800Flowers won Best Retail Mobile Shopping Site by the Mobile Shopping Summit, I feel like it was an opportunity missed, but only because of the stellar job you and your partners did with Candy.com – enjoy that site!
    What I said in comments is that .mobi might have a 2nd wind as an extension, with the rise of smartphones. For sure, when you type,”mobile tech,” into Google without quotes, what domain with what extension appears position 1?

    Reply
  26. Marvin Gardens

    Keep in mind, the 61% leakage will not just be from the .CO, but also the .NET, the .ORG, the .BIZ, the .US, all country codes and every other tld out there. I would imagine that the soon to be introduced gTLD’s leakage will suck even more.
    In essence, the .COM guy will never need to do any advertising whatsoever to generate traffic while the poor schlubs with the alternative extensions will need to promote daily and tread water like crazy.
    Motto of the story. Don’t let those .COM’s lapse. All other TLD’s are a waste of time. To attempt to use them without owning the corresponding .COM is paramount to building a house on a foundation of quicksand.

    Reply
  27. Christopher

    Well, Rick, I’ve never stopped so low as to call you a name but I guess integrity doesn’t mean the same to everyone. I thought you could at least admit that the post is shrill by definition….I mean, you’re screaming in a RED font :)
    I have no ill will toward any domain investor and I really don’t know why you have such anger towards me or any others that take the time to read your posts and join the discussion. What is so wrong with not agreeing with you? You have plenty of sycophants here…do you really just want an echo chamber?

    Reply
  28. Christopher

    I’ve never said .co is better than .com but they are selling if you own the right kind…names and brandables….at least those are the only ones that have sold for me. Look, you talk about facts and I’m not saying they aren’t but another fact is that people are buying .co’s and I’ve had no less than 8 inquiries this week (very atypical however) so I also know the interest is there. Please don’t berate us for disagreeing with you.

    Reply
  29. Rick Schwartz

    Some deal with emotions as that is all they have.
    I deal with FACTS that make emotions go off the deep end.
    Facts are responded to with personal insults of motives and such Nothing but the facts.
    Now it is time to take those FACTS and use them. 61% loss is devastating by any standard you want to use. Anyone putting lipstick on this pig has an agenda. Pure and simple.
    And when this 61% number circulates, watch for a major re-think of things.
    Let me be 100% clear. Promote any extension using mass advertising that you want. But if you don’t own the .com counterpart, you are making a huge and costly mistake. There is no argument. This is settled. It’s over. Period the end.
    There will still be push back with those with MOTIVES and financial gain. But now they will look like FOOLS every time they TRY and bullshit us.

    Reply
  30. spinoza

    “I get to stuff that shit back in the mouths of those little pricks.” I don’t understand how trash talking helping making your point???
    The only reason getting a .co is for SEO. as a brandable extension I’ll take the .net & .org
    You are going to loose traffic to the .com with any extension, but the question is how much traffic you will get, if any with an alternative.
    I have more than a few .net, and .orgs, and they are getting decent traffic. I hand registered them, and I don’t really care about the other extensions which I cant get.

    Reply
  31. Brad Mugford

    @ Marvin Gardens
    “Keep in mind, the 61% leakage will not just be from the .CO, but also the .NET, the .ORG, the .BIZ, the .US, all country codes and every other tld out there. I would imagine that the soon to be introduced gTLD’s leakage will suck even more.”
    There will be some traffic loss, but nothing close to .CO. NET/ORG have been around 25+ years with broad awareness and credibility. They are well known.
    .CO has two major things going against it when it comes to consumer confusion -
    1.) .CO is not well known. There is hardly any broad awareness.
    2.) The similarity to the most well known extension .COM
    Many people are just going to assume .COM when they seen .CO advertised. That is not really the case with .NET and .ORG
    Brad

    Reply
  32. Rick Schwartz

    Spinoza, Because I have taken a lot of personal abuse over the years for my theories. From all sides. All the way back to folks not even believing there was such a thing as type ins and natural traffic. I have said for well over a year that this”Experiment” would be a defining point. A birdie in the mine and some have gotten a little defensive. But they can’t defend those numbers. And when they try with a distraction, I am going to do exactly what I said. With FACTS.
    If you were to go back and read all the comments just on this subject, you would have a better understanding. Folks make it personal to protect their turf or distort the facts. I could give a shit about anyone’s”turf.” I care about facts and making sure they are clear for all to know regardless of the headwind of bullshit I have had to put up with.
    See we can debate points like how effective their advertising campaign was and how that affects the numbers. That is legit. But the bullshit is not. I could give a rats ass about somebody have 8 inquiries last week. Means nothing to me. I hope he gets 1000. That is not even on the radar screen. So when I have to put up with distractions, posting anons that try and hide their true identities because of their TURF, I am going to do exactly what I said with FACTS. FACTS. NUMBERS.

    Reply
  33. Jacek

    And I keep on buying single words .co’s as in my opinion they could be worth more than $8,99 someday. As for now I can only wish I could get single word .com’s for $8,99 :)
    Don’t You think the 2010′s could be the same as the 9o’s for .com’s pricewise as the Internet will keep on growing?
    How come people don’t confuse t.co ?

    Reply
  34. Bruce Diller

    Rick
    “50% of my advertising is wasted, I just don’t know which 50%” – NOW YOU KNOW .co
    In the diamond business I had a mentor who would say”make sure you are the guy riding the elephant and not the guy cleaning up after it”. In my view those who are challenging you are the ‘ones cleaning up after the elephant’ meaning they are seeking to make money on the backs of others hard work in the hopes of catching a few typos to earn their living.
    The reality is, as history KEEPS proving the REAL money to be made is in developing a solution to people’s needs i.e. developing a website with real words, real information, real products…
    Personally I read the blogs of others to learn, to gain insight and to enhance my earning potential. AND for that I say a BIG THANK YOU to you Rick because while we have never met (yet) I have gained very valuable knowledge.
    Thank you Rick 
    One man one vote
    Bruce

    Reply
  35. Altaf

    From the following statistics all guesses will be clear:
    Alexa (measuring global traffic)
    .com: 517,898 sites
    .net: 59,746 sites
    .org: 40,441 sites
    .info: 16,646 sites
    .biz: 3,835 sites
    .tv: 3,407 sites
    .us: 2,649 sites
    .me: 1,962 sites
    .cc: 1,889 sites
    .co: 1,166 sites
    .ws: 896 sites
    .tk: 483 sites
    .to: 413 sites
    .mobi: 378 sites
    .name: 348 sites
    .pro: 247 sites
    So better to be with Rick’s logical FACTS. No need to prove it to the Naysayers.

    Reply
  36. Jacek

    It’s not this simple -> in order to get the real picture You should have divided the numbers by several variables of different weight such as (most important) the TIME (25years of .com v. 2years of .co)
    regards
    Jacek
    ps. Could You give me the link You’ve been using to get the data

    Reply
  37. Christopher

    Why do you care so much about”stuff[ing] that shit back in the mouths of those little pricks.”?
    It seems like you are more than a little angry. Sit back, relax, enjoy your money.
    The Overstock .co leakage may be a FACT but it is only ONE fact and not the ONLY fact.
    Jacek made a very good point. When you can get domain for $10 and sell it for $500 you are doing fantastic. Many, many companies would pay $500 for a domain that isn’t pigeon shit. That is where the .co market is right now. No one is going to pay $750k for iReport.co nor should they. This is not the argument that most .co investors are putting forth.
    You can say whatever you like about my arguments but please don’t stop to namecalling. Calling me a schmuck doesn’t make you more of a mensch.

    Reply
  38. SEO Cornwall

    Good post but according to stats, the people in the UK hold our ccTLD in high regard and often trust it over the .com extension. Of course this will depend on the domain, situation etc etc.
    I disagree that every other extension other than .com is rendered useless because of this o.co experience.

    Reply
  39. John

    Any company that doesn’t own the .COM or even tries to buy the garbage hyphenated version isn’t serious about succeeding. They don’t get it, they have people on staff who don’t get it, they don’t have big picture thinking and they obviously don’t believe enough in themselves to pay up for a .COM. One either lives on Malibu Beach or doesn’t. Living across the street isn’t the same and never will be.

    Reply
  40. steve

    Everyone thinks they know domains just by knowing there exists a .com and a .net
    But I discovered something. People are stupid as shit.
    And people think they are smart as shit.
    What I hate about domaining is the asses that go to the forums and demand you send them domains and prices…..Like I got nothing better to do then send some lowball fukwad a list of my domains to get a lowball counter offer.
    I learned after .mobi , but .co had a chance.
    The funny thing about this world is Overstock can screw the pooch 10 times and just get it right one time and they win. Because the other companies don’t do anything.
    I hate quoting Rick, but anyone with patience and a brain, which is most of us, can make it big. But everyone insists on failing.

    Reply
  41. Christopher

    Not everyone can live in Malibu Beach and not everyone can have Candy.com
    This is why domains are valuable and why top .coms are VERY valuable.
    The fact that you cant live in Malibu Beach doesn’t mean EVERYTHING though. There are plenty of other nice places to live….I would be very happy to own Candy.co and it cost a tiny fraction of .com. Even with the bleed it would be a nice domain to own.

    Reply
  42. Johnnie

    I agree with the premise of this post, .co is pretty much a joke, and while I agree with you, this comment doesn’t make sense to me:
    “Yes, I registered 2500 .co domains BEFORE we had all this information.”
    What info? .co has always been way too similar to .com. That info was there from the start, it’s just letters, no hidden info in that.

    Reply
  43. Emma

    Rick! how much did you invest in dot co domains, how many dot co domain names?? Be honnest Rick

    Reply
  44. The Other Adam

    “A nice domain to own” certainly doesn’t mean it’s going to be the best place to do business.
    I think the point is that companies shouldn’t waste their time,effort, ad dollars, etc on something that doesn’t work as expected. Why settle for ad spend loss of 61% when you can get 100% return.

    Reply
  45. owen frager

    Problem is their marketing. I perceive them like Orchard St, Saw Grass Mall, Filenes Basement- the ads look like worth ave- they should use multiple domain names and email- Save The Date This Wed all GE Appliances at up to 70% off- they should be the first price check (great name for them) you make before buying something. That’s what they should stand for in your mind. But after 10 years of TV and Google buys they don’t. It’s easy to make .co take the fall for a bad Christmas. But they’ve been around as long as Zappos who pinged 24 million customers by email 3x a week to deliver their RECORD quarter.
    BTW, You own many alternate gateways for them: . BuyWholesale.com . . . BuyCloseouts.com . . . Cheapest.com They guy with sale.com, discount.com, liquidator.com etc uses Overstook as a keyword to trap you into a survey- looks like phishing to me. But for the cost of one commercial, they all could be working to make the CEO a bonus instead of a trip to the woodshed.

    Reply
  46. Rick Schwartz

    Emma,
    I have looked at your comments you have made here over time.
    You bring no value and you spread misinformation about me personally.
    You are a nobody with a jealous agenda. You are a waste of time.
    You are a ghost.
    Please list your contributions to the domain industry.
    Please post all your trademark domains.
    Please post a sample of your spam emails.
    Thanks Dear!

    Reply
  47. Rick Schwartz

    If an intelligent business person knew they would BLEED 61% of their traffic that they paid to get but never even showed up, would they still buy into the .co/.whatever experiment? I doubt it. Maybe the traffic loss should be marked on the label so folks that are not aware don’t get duped.
    So if you are one of those pumping and dumping .Co…..I think you should be required to disclose that advertising a .co can result in a loss of 60% of your efforts and ad dollars. If you are not doing that then you are fooling and misleading folks. You are no longer ignorant of this. So FULL DISCLOSURE is something you folks should seriously think about and do or I think you will be classified in a negative light from NOW ON!

    Reply
  48. Rick Schwartz

    Owen’s post today is well balanced.
    There is a place for .co. But it is not in advertising and national branding unless your goal is to lose business, lose money and lose and confuse customers.
    And if the competitor owns the .com and they plan on building on .co, they need to understand that is SUICIDE!
    That must be made clear to folks. It is not the second coming.
    Put it in the proper place and be clear about it.
    http://fragerfactor.blogspot.com/2012/03/best-co-investment-is-staring-you-in.html

    Reply
  49. John

    At the end of the day this .Co experiment wasn’t really needed for Overstock. I like Patrick Byrne and they guy has been through a lot. But, the stock has a marketcap currently of $141 million as of today & is at near an all time low from what i can see. If I was on his board I would tell him to get back to basics and hire better people that can execute well. The ones that talked him into trying to rebrand using a .co need to go. There has to be consequences for bad decisions. The shareholders cannot be the only ones to suffer here while the executives get paid for basically failing. The .COM name was never the problem and this really should be a lesson for companies that try to reinvent something that works perfectly fine.

    Reply
  50. Jeff Schneider

    Hello Rick,
    As you say if you want to piss away the worlds largest Traffic Stream Build your Virtual Business Foundation outside The .COM Channel. Does this make sense? More like Nonsense !
    The Worlds largest corporations know where the Worlds largest Traffic Stream ever created in recorded history is, THATS why they are .COM Channel Owners ! Class Over !

    Reply
  51. WhoDatDog

    I told those scumbag pumpers at DN Forum that the whole thing was a fraud and a joke. They were pumping .co and when O.co was announced they got all excited. They got so defensive when I told them what a scam the whole game was.
    Now, EVERY FORUM on earth is a major league GHOST TOWN. The scammers got the upper-hand and now look what they got. I blame the veteran domainers just as much as I blame the idiot scammers and low-life pumpers, as they had a chance to stop this nonsense many times, but they are so desperate to make a living themselves that they let this stuff contaminate every forum, year after year after year.
    I would rather have a DEAD RAT in my mouth then ever get near one of these loser extensions. Any and all people who have ever pumped this stuff, or have allowed the registrars, parking companies, forum participants, and others to basically ruin the domain world as we know it, should all be ashamed of themselves. I won’t do business with any of them, and I would love to see them all become homeless and have their loved one’s abandon them.
    Be prepared for another round of this garbage. There is a new scam every few months. What’s the new one, .XXX? I don’t even pay much attention.
    Dotcom will always be KING. Just like the principles of Warren Buffett will always be the strongest. If you don’t know why dotcom has to be king, then you should never ever buy another domain name.
    It is real simple. Until you have made a lot of money buying and selling dotcom names, then you should NEVER buy a name in another extension. Then, after making a ton of money in dotcom’s, you would probably still be wise to never waste a minute of your time thinking about other extensions.
    Have fun, scammers…..lol. I know some of you clowns have to be bankrupt….raise your hand, idiots.

    Reply
  52. Donny M

    I tell you what. What I have learned is that basically all future extensions are going to follow the same path. What more information does someone need.
    Look how much negativity is on this board. Nothing will change except that new extensions will come out and predict gloom and doom for .com. It’s almost like reading comments on a stock board everyone seems to have an agenda.
    I hope this will present the last buying opportunity ever for .com names. Bashing will scare off some .com owners.. I can’t wait.
    When a new product comes out and you see a company do a commercial on TV and use the .org or .net or even .tv> Why is it that domain name owners all brag that they got all this traffic with out having to do a thing. Could it because they own the .com
    The o.co people at least had some balls and tried. But why did they not see when using anything other than a .com will net you less sales. They already have the answer but why could they not see this. For 350k I would of just bought os.com and be done with it.
    I do think that generic .co domain names can get 1-5% of a .com.
    in another country not the US. So if you’re not at least buying .co names in the generic form then you going to lose. I have one .co that will get 10-50k for. Then all that money is going to buy 1 decent .com name. Like someone said Repeat-Repeat.

    Reply
  53. L

    They (Overstock) do deserve some credit for owning their fuckup- that speaks positively about their internal, corporate culture- but it’s a bit troubling that the people at the helm of a rather significant .com company are so totally oblivious to the relationship between consumers and the .com extension. Of all people who would be expected to understand that…
    Sure, we can expect that brand of cluelessness from a few partisan, come-lately domainer types who shovel money into these bag of shit extensions then feel the need to make excuses for them, but shocking to see such oblivion from the management a pretty significant eCommerce company.

    Reply
  54. William

    Disagree. Same chip, different dip.
    Sure, maybe some alternative tlds suck less than others and all will certainly work…but only .com will work well.

    Reply
  55. Rick Schwartz

    10% leak…..Not good but it may work out
    20% leak…..This is hurting business
    25% leak…..This is really hurting business
    33% leak…..This is doing real damage and we may not survive
    40% leak…..Stop the madness or we will go belly up
    50% leak…..Are you insane. Stop before it is too late
    60% leak…..The company can no longer survive and must reverse course by Friday.
    70% leak…..Do you work for the competition?
    80% leak….We need more time and investors
    90% leak…..We need more $$$ to advertise
    100% leak…Get more investors and we will pour it all in advertising
    or
    Get a third rate .com and have a 10% leak.
    Get a decent 2 word .com domain and have 0% leak.
    Pay for a specific .com domain and add 25% from everyone else’s leak.
    Matter of fact, I just picked a very difficult keyword.”Mortgage” and on the #2 attempt came up with a very useable .com domain name. $8. So there is no shortage of domains, just a shortage of creative people with ideas that don’t give up after 5 minutes and declare they are all gone. Just not true. Unlimited amount of solid .com domains to last a very long time.
    There is no industry on earth that one can’t find a decent two or 3 word .com that actually means something and passes all the tests. It just takes a few hours of time and some digging. Not giving up and settling. That is for a hand registered domain. There are plenty on the aftermarket for a few hundred dollars. Just got to invest a few hours of time and dig and know what to look for. Settling for a .co is a decision that will likely cost you money every day of your life instead of making you money. Add up all the lost business and only a schmuck would ignore it. We are not talking a small percent. We are talking the majority of folks. The majority by a wide margin. How can anyone reading my blog possibly ignore that unless they were agenda driven? No business person is going to gloss that over.
    If you are a small business and you use a .co, you will remain a small business. Every degree of success will come at a very expensive cost. The last few points a company takes in on gross sales is 100% profit. It’s the money you put in your pocket when all other bills are paid. Except for one thing, for every $10,000 you put in YOUR pocket, you will have an invisible and unknown partner taking just as much and much more. See without them you would have gotten to your”Break even” point much sooner. Don’t understand wtf I am talking about? Whose problem is that? Whose fault is that? Time to get up to speed and see business through the eyes of being a business person. Until you do that, you just play a part until it comes crashing down. Don’t be in the diamond business and not know what”Flawless” means.

    Reply
  56. domain guy

    ahh…the king is upset today…with the verification of 60% leakage…I agree with most of your commets however I would add that .org has an identity and if you are a npo you are at the right location on the web…you really don’t care about .com.
    I also think google will add some type of adjustment to their search when the roll out of all the new extensions start to gain traction.theres too much money on the line not to recognize suffix alternatives.

    Reply
  57. PNR Status

    Thanks for another eye-opener, Rick. Dotcom is the king. Numbers speak louder than words. If one’s content is intended for all and one wants a worldwide audience, there is no other option but to go for dotcom.

    Reply
  58. Magoogle

    1st I will point out I believe .com is king.
    That being said, it is hard to project real information about a simple set of stats. If you want to draw larger conclusions, you need more info on those o.com numbers. My questions would be how many typed o.com two or tree times before giving up or got to the site after the first failed hit. Also, how many .com hits came from search engine seeks ?
    I always look for more information within a number set as you are not getting a complete picture.
    My guess is that they probably lost 20%. That is still huge.
    This brings up a bigger point. Why when you have a trademark, protect and defend your mark and spend lots of money doing so….
    Why would you want to muddy the water ?
    In the future, I think it weakens your position of defending your mark. But what do I know, I just observe and crunch numbers on my observations.
    Now for those who want to draw conclusions from that Alexa TLD data provided by a poster, please don’t forget where all the registrations are and where the traffic is should have some relationship. None of this means you can not have a successful site on some other TLD but if you are looking a the largest global picture, the .com will probably cut your losses.
    Its worth pointing out many non .com sites that have a great business as their SEO and a good product/name made the TLD meaningless. They are a minority by far.

    Reply
  59. Rick Schwartz

    “My questions would be how many typed o.com two or tree times before giving up or got to the site after the first failed hit. Also, how many .com hits came from search engine seeks ? I always look for more information within a number set as you are not getting a complete picture.”
    Let’s follow that ball. So the customer types in O.com a few times and gets nothing. Assume 50% will give up from the get go. So that takes the 61% to about 30%. Of those folks you could assume that 50% would type in Overstock.com and 50% would do a Google search. So even if they get 100% of those folks, they will possibly be double paying for that Google traffic. So besides the leak, you get to pull that anchor in the form of paying twice for the same customer.
    But the reason that there is not much digging is at 61%, it is such a colossal failure you can’t put this”Humpty Dumpy” back together again. It’s a disaster on the face of it. That said, I think your bottom line number was 20% and mine is about 40% when all factored in.
    For folks that still can’t wrap their head around this, use this example: If your business operated in such a way that it had to pay a 20%, 40% or 60% TAX on everything it bought, while others were not, how long do you think you could be competitive and your business could survive?

    Reply
  60. ADvermain

    LOL this reminds me, me and a few other people were arguing with a guy a few weeks ago on elliot’s blog about the .co extension. He said”.com is no longer noticed, .co is the new .com and .co’s are becoming more popular”. I said you are out of your mind .com is KING no matter what hands down, no extension will come close to dot com. This article just reassures me that this dude was out of his mind. I love your blog posts Rick, outstanding!

    Reply
  61. Rick Schwartz

    The very first blog post I ever made ended with the following paragraph and it applies 100% to .Co. 1000%. Guaranteed failure. You can’t build a business as somebody here pointed out on a foundation of quicksand. .Co is quicksand and here is why it is guaranteed to fail. Fail before you even start.
    “I will leave you with my most important thought. When you leave New York and set sail for London and you end up on the shores of Africa…..your problem did not occur when you landed in Africa, it happened before you even set sail for New York. Point is……99.9% of ALL failures are due to a bad or quick decision in the beginning or the planning stage. So the likelihood of any success can easily be determined before you even begin. Usually a SIMPLE change can also change your entire future fortunes. If you walk east looking for the sunset you will likely become disappointed, angry and frustrated. Their frustration boils over and they last out at the world. Especially anyone telling them they are wrong. Just a 180 degree shift on one thing can change your destiny. But before you do that you MUST STOP. Stop in your tracks. If you don’t start at a STOP, you lose before you begin.”
    http://www.ricksblog.com/my_weblog/2007/04/hi_folks_a_few_.html

    Reply
  62. That is pitiful

    Shame on Adam Dicker then. That is pretty pitiful what he wrote there. So, I guess Adam Dicker, if approached by someone he really cared about, would suggest to them to start a business with a .Co name.
    That is horrifying. This is what it has come to. People who know better, and who would never start a real business on .Co are scamming new domainers into buying this crap. All for the advertising dollar.
    Highly unethical, Adam.

    Reply
  63. ADAM

    @ Thats pitful
    I agree 100% with you
    But to me horrifying is how Dick er looks now. Hope he dose some exercise one day..

    Reply
  64. That is pitiful

    He must be constantly feasting on the buffet that is the unsuspecting newbie. What a shame. That used to be a good forum, but when you let people commit legitimate crimes there, crimes that in the real world would be prosecuted for fraud, then that is what you get.
    Dn Forum is the place where worthless names go to die. I mean, I am talking names that are not even intelligible to normal humans are floating around that place like an ugly turd circling the drain.
    Domainers and Poker players are right there with Real Estate agents and used car dealers……bringing out the worst in the human race all because of bad ideas combining with money.

    Reply
  65. Mobiletechtv

    @ rick said:”There is no industry on earth that one can’t find a decent two or 3 word .com that actually means something and passes all the tests. It just takes a few hours of time and some digging.”
    That is reassuring. I am proud to say I didn’t register a single dot co, and have built a little portfolio of emerging technologies domains on dot com. But I registered a couple dot tvs – I just enjoy when a program comes on with name.tv on the info bar, when you click, Info on your remote. But I would register, nametv.com if I wanted to build a brand, as I did with MobileTech.tv. MobileTechTV.com points to it. Because I listened to you!

    Reply
  66. Ian

    I constantly underwhelmed by so called large ecommerce companies with absolutely crap sites. Overstock in my opinion meets that test, judging by the stock they do have they could well be sourcing it as new from the far east as the cost relative to their sales price would still be profitable.
    Leakage matters depending on what you do and your business model. If I was relying to a greater degree on buyer recollection of my URL and I had plenty of undifferentiated competitors then I’d be very worried about leakage. If my traffic was SE driven and it was more information content etc then I might not be so worried.
    So I’d say to anyone, if you are going to deal in the sale of physical goods or rely on joe average public then you want to make recollection a number 1 priority… I rather have a 3 word .com than a 1 word .co

    Reply
  67. E.Borchers

    I would buy a .co only if it would be typo of a dotcom (and never do any seo for it) just redirect the typo traffic to an own .com (and do seo only for the. Com owned) . Thats the best strategy i think for. Co.
    Best regards.

    Reply
  68. Savya Sathe

    It is now bydefualt, that people will type in .com. No matter how you can market .co the .com will be in peoples mind. An eye opener blog for those who are still thinking there .co will work.

    Reply

Leave a Reply