Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	spot
Date/Time:	Sat, October 27, 2001 at 3:02 AM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject:	Yes, I agree with the 1 apiece recommendation, and that is my main grumble with new.net
Message:
I wouldn't want any one company to be in charge of so many domains. I think 40 gtlds controlled by 40 companies would work as long as the distinction between the intended purpuse or flavour of the domain is clear. .museum and .aero for example are unlikely to cause much confusion and are distinct. This form of 'product differentiation' would also help to keep the demand for each domain more inelastic, and therefore retain their value much more than if the domains were in close competition with eachother. Also our minds can remember a lot of distinct domains much easier than similar meaning ones, since they are associated and visualised very differently helping us to remember them.

Message Thread:

• Realistic expectations and a .INFO valuation model — challenge, October 26 @ 3:37 PM (2/29)
• .INFO — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 5:28 PM (0/0)
• Quite Right — richard_henderson, October 26 @ 5:14 PM (2/27)
• .info is a boon...... — onmove, October 26 @ 7:53 PM (3/7)
• You just described the use of every TLD on the planet .... — cgrady, October 26 @ 10:36 PM (0/0)
• kindred spirits - I am in agreement with above posters - but — antipodes, October 26 @ 10:30 PM (1/1)
• I have not forgotten about the appalling arse they made on purpose — spot, October 26 @ 10:56 PM (0/0)
• I agree! — cambler, October 26 @ 8:01 PM (1/3)
• How many more TLDs would you like to see added to the root? As many as new.net are pushing for? — spot, October 26 @ 10:59 PM (1/2)
• How many? — cambler, October 27 @ 1:16 AM (1/1)
• Yes, I agree with the 1 apiece recommendation, and that is my main grumble with new.net — spot, October 27 @ 3:02 AM (0/0)
• The argument for fairness — challenge, October 26 @ 6:23 PM (1/18)
• Fairness — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 7:03 PM (1/17)
• Logic — challenge, October 26 @ 8:08 PM (1/16)
• Overlap — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 8:58 PM (2/15)
• I Agree! NO OVERLAP! — Timberstone, October 27 @ 5:33 AM (0/0)
• Overlap — cambler, October 26 @ 9:10 PM (1/13)
• Yes. — S. Hudgens, October 26 @ 9:36 PM (1/12)
• Overlap — challenge, October 26 @ 11:28 PM (2/11)
• Overlap is irrelevant — cgrady, October 27 @ 5:19 PM (0/0)
• Banging heads — cambler, October 27 @ 1:20 AM (2/9)
• urr... — InternetAdvocate, October 28 @ 10:01 PM (1/1)
• Shows you how long ago I left LA! — cambler, October 29 @ 4:15 AM (0/0)
• Wrong again — challenge, October 27 @ 4:29 PM (3/6)
• Don't belong? — cambler, October 27 @ 6:08 PM (1/1)
• TLDs selected in November 2000 — Jim Fleming, October 27 @ 6:20 PM (0/0)
• No overlap = monopoly — cgrady, October 27 @ 5:46 PM (1/2)
• Monopolistic... — InternetAdvocate, October 28 @ 10:04 PM (1/1)
• You're right — cambler, October 29 @ 4:17 AM (0/0)
• Where should .WEB people be ? — Jim Fleming, October 27 @ 5:32 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy