Communication agencies and ".BRANDs"

What is the job of a communication agency but to help other companies with their communication?

New gTLDs belong to communication
At least, it is what I thought until I noticed that - as an independent new gTLD consultant - I started to receive more calls from communication agencies with that question:

"M. Guillon, we receive a question about creating a domain name extension and we would require your help to answer our client."

Translation:

"M. Guillon, our clients asked about creating his extension and we have no clue what he is talking about, can you please help us so we don't look like idiots?"

I am often amazed to note that communication agencies don't really worry about domain names when I am able to tell a customer with a new project: "if the domain name you want to register is taken, then consider changing the name of your company or your Trademark". And I do not necessarily refer to new domain names from the ICANN new gTLD program here.

A domain name is where it all starts for a company on Internet so "yes": we're talking about serious communication here because what follows is a sound in someone's mouth, a domain name written on a visit card; on paper press: it is what readers will try to remember to find a company's website on Internet.

Communication agencies don't know about ".BRANDs"
Who, more than communication experts, want to deliver innovation to their client? As a new gTLD expert with a degree in marketing and communication, I strongly think that communication specialists need to be educated, and I don't mean to be "trained" here but educated first: the first step is to comprehend what a ".BRAND" domain name extension can bring to a Trademark instead of leaving it with just a "hey it's too expensive".

There are plenty of reasons why a .BRAND new gTLD can benefit to a Trademark or a company (precision, branding, SEO with generic domains, control of the security, identity...) but isn't one of best selling point to own a personalized domain name extension, the possibility to initiate TODAY, the online future of a company?

Existing ".BRAND" new gTLD applicants
Many have had their extension since 2014 but they don't use it. We are in 2017 and the next round of the ICANN new gTLD program won't start before 2020 (more or less): isn't it time to initiate a strategy to be in place when competition starts from scratch in the next application round of the ICANN new gTLD program? A .BRAND personalized domain name extension is an opportunity to get years ahead the competition but it requires...to start...to be in place on time.

I checked the list of the FRENCH new gTLD applicants and few .BRANDs use their extension. I feel they miss an opportunity to become a game changer: in the travel industry in particular when -  and this is just one example - so many geographic domain names could be used! Do communication agencies only know how a .BRAND can be used? And if they don't, isn't it time?

No need to replace the existing
A .BRAND does not necessarily require to change it all and replace the existing strategy (when there is one). It first requires to sit behind a table, check which scenarios can be put in place, what the objectives of a company are and where does that company wants to be in 5 to 10 years: at the exact same place facing the exact same online communication problems as its competitors, or a few years ahead having demonstrated strong innovation?

Looking forward to innovate? Talk to Jovenet Consulting.

Progress of New gTLD Program reviews

This is an interesting PDF to download. I suggest the reading of:

• Program Reviews & Policy Timeline (Projected)
• Next Steps
• New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Policy Development Procedure Working Group Avri Doria, Jeff Neuman
• Timeline – Where are we now?
• Review of All Rights Protection Mechanisms Policy Development Procedure Working Group Phil Corwin
• What are the current challenges & issues under discussion?
• Future Impact?
• Risk factors (disruptive new gTLD developments)
• Recommendations

Download the PDF

New gTLDs: what you missed

This is the list of publications that you could find in our previous newsletters. Subscribe to receive them directly in your email.

1. Public Comments: recommendations for new gTLDs;
2. HOT - How much it costs to run a domain name registry;
3. Getting Your TLD Legal in China (the MIIT Process Unboxed);
4. OUPS - The end of the ICANN new gTLD program?
5. Question/Answers: if ICANN only charges 18¢ per domain name, why am I paying $10?
6. Is this a death spiral for new top level domain names?
7. Und was hat Canon nun damit zu tun?
8. Protecting Your Brand’s Email Channel (.BANK and .INSURANCE);
9. ICANN: should there in fact be additional new gTLDs in the future?
10. HOT - Big price increases needed to keep new gTLDs alive;
11. HOT - What are the different new gTLDs and which are...the future ones?
12. New gTLD service providers - Want to exist in "Round 2"?
13. Donuts’ appeal means .Web is a long way off;
14. The .FUN Sunrise Period ends: Friday, 24 March, 2017 - 16:00 check the calendar;
15. New gTLD Applications for .HOME, .CORP, and .MAIL;
16. Authentic Web Announces Financing;
17. The .LOTTO new gTLD (lawsuit);
18. The Top 10 New gTLDs Sold in 2017 to Date;
19. How the New Domains Translate into the Real World;
20. Surprising conclusion about the languages of new TLDs;
21. Podcast: In the ..CLOUD;
22. Creating a brand new gTLD? Long list of ideas here;
23. New - New gTLD Dispute Resolution Procedure;
24. Never Draw Quick Conclusions Based on New gTLD Stats;
25. French - Les nTLDs tendent à s’imposer – en volumes:
1. Une tendance à la stabilisation du marché des noms de domaine ? 
2. Etat statistique des nTLDs au samedi 4/03/17 (données publiées) ;
3. Entre les sirènes chinoises et « l’avenir radieux » d’un Second Round ;
4. La preuve par l’exemple ;
5. The Dark Side of the [.]MOON;
26. Google is testing the .HOW new gTLD
27. How MLB is using its .MLB domain name;
28. ICANN GDD: New gTLD Program Reviews;
29. Early access to .eco trade names for non-profits and NGOs;
30. Domainer Rails Against New Extensions;
31. The automotive URLs that are the gold standard for dealerships;
32. Domaintest.boo (by Google).

ICANN new gTLDs: I made it to "participate"

As a proud member of the PDPGW, the PPDWG, sorry, the PDDWG, sorry again I'll make it simple, the New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Working Group, I could finally make it to join discussions and PARTICIPATE.

ICANN wants/needs more people to help, they can be individuals and professionals...politicians too.

I once tried to participate in the .WINE and .VIN new gTLD discussions in 2011 and in 2013 but the ICANN seemed more interested in answering to French ministry Axelle Lemaire on the 18 June 2014 with zero knowledge on the subject, rather than to me a year before on the 3 April 2013, and with concrete solutions. But we all know how it works, don't we? ;-)

Anyway...

This time I decided to "participate" in the ICANN process the right way and joined the right working group. At ICANN, it is how you participate: you join a Working Group (often called "WG") to add what you think is good, to improve the next round of the ICANN new gTLD program. Then, some other people deal with it. There are conference calls you can attend and meeting where all these people can gather to discuss. Then these solutions are presented to - I am not sure about my answer - "a council" but the ICANN board is the one to have the final decision. Can someone help me here because I did not find who decides in the official doucumentation.

My contribution: Singular and Plural TLDs are "a mess"

For a consumer (the "registrant" for geeks), it is already difficult to choose if a domain name will be registered with or without an "s" (at the second level for geeks) so one can imagine how COMPLEX it is when the exact same domain name extension also exists in its plural version with another "s" (at the first level for geeks). A list of all these extensions is available here.

An example

An example to give - and which did not exist prior to the launching of new gTLDs - is this owner of a gift shop, planning to register a domain name for his online boutique, who does not know that he can register the same domain name ending in ".gifts" (with an "s") when he registered myonlineboutique.gift (with no "s").

How I made it to "participate"

The issue of Singular coexisting with Plural TLDs is an issue that I wanted to see resolved in the next round of the ICANN new gTLD program, so I added my explanation and solution to the draft on Work Track Three: Objections. Basically, I added to saying that it was an issue and that, as a solution, either one or the other TLD should be validated, but not the two of them because it is very confusing for consumers.

I don't know how other participants make it to spend SO MUCH time on this, and I admit that I am impressed and would like to be able to contribute as much as them, but unfortunately, I cannot afford it: time is money and days are shorts. I received a lot of emails from the organizers with updates and offerings to join calls and meet in the next ICANN meeting in Copenhagen but again...even if I live in France, Copenhagen is not next door: my clients are.

So: what's next?

The result of my contribution now appears in the COMPETITION, CONSUMER TRUST AND CONSUMER CHOICE REVIEW TEAM DRAFT REPORT. It is a 144 pages document which lists everything that is being discussed as improvements for Round two of the ICANN new gTLD program.

Don't expect to find a solution to the problem in this document because, at this stage, the wording looks more like:

"it would appear there was not a clear consistent ruling in all cases. In some cases, singular and plural versions were not considered to be confusingly similar" or "It would appear that inconsistency in outcome on singular/plural cases arose because the DRSP process allowed for different expert panelists to examine individual cases although they were based on similar situations".

Five years after, we are still in the "analysis mode" rather than in the "solution mode" but some possible solutions to the problem start to appear:

"This could be avoided in future by ensuring that all similar cases of plural versus singular strings were examined by the same expert panelist or by determining in advance that strings would not be delegated for singular and plurals of the same gTLD" and "The Subsequent Procedures PDP should consider adopting new policies to avoid the potential for inconsistent results in string confusion objections".

A consensus?
A "success measure" appears on page 117 and says:

"...should singular and plural versions be allowed, objection panels evaluate all such cases with a consistent approach such that all single or plural disputes are resolved in the same manner".

If this is no final decision to definitely kill singular VS Plural versions of a TLD, it definitely is a good start. Let's hope  that such isolate problem won't take years to be solved.

Houston: we have a problem

ICANN is discussing the problem of Singular VS Plural new gTLDs at the moment and decisions "should be taken" prior round 2 to begin, in regard to this awful option to allow both strings to exist at the same time. The draft of the report can be reviewed here (PDF download). It starts page 115.

Something that I don't understand
This is an extract of the REAL ESTATE new gTLD report (entitled "Singular and Plural new generic Top-Level Domains") from March 2017, which clearly shows that there is a HUGE difference between the number of registered domain names ending in ".loan" (instead of ".com") and the number of domains ending in ".loans", with an "s".

Of course, I have my idea about this surprisingly high difference but I am interested in hearing other explanations.

Uniregistry Price Hike Up to 30 Times: can ICANN save the registrants?

The price hike by Uniregistry is a right move executed in a wrong way. With this decision:

• Uniregistry Wins 
• ICANN Loses 
• Old Registrants Lose with no choice 
• New Registrants Lose with a choice 

The steep price increase is likely to make Uniregistry new gtlds more profitable. However, they do not seem to care for their existing registrants which includes me. Businesses use domain for online presence. This domain become a part of their online existence and they cannot afford to lose it. This is where Uniregistry is trying to make money. A bigger problems lies with what would be the future price hikes.

A big problem for existing registrants is illustrated below.

.Hosting tld current and assumed registrations with proposed 15 times price increase:

In the above table you would notice that Uniregistry is making exceptionally good sales even if their number of registration fall by 75% with every price raise.

What about the poor registrants, who developed and promoted their website by using the .hosting and similar new gtld from Uniregistry. Unfortunately, many of the registrants will be forced to abandon their domain as paying that kind of price will be out of question. The money and the efforts that this registrants have spend to brand their domains is all lost. Does Uniregistry care for this?

For a new registrant, they have a choice whether to pay or not for the high price tlds. However, for the existing registrant their business is trapped in this domain and they have no choice but to pay whatever is asked for.

It is understandable for Uniregistry to increase prices as they need to make the tlds profitable, but definitely not by putting the existing customers under the hammer.

A similar price increase took with certain tlds from Donuts. They handled it really well. The price increase was only for the new customers. Old customers remain unaffected. This showed that Donuts registry cared for the business profitability as well as their customers.

Being a fan of new gtld I will stick to new gtld domains, however, I will stay away from registries that charge their existing users exorbitantly and assume that prior notice would be sufficient.

ICANN, as domain registrant we believe that you are their to protect our interest. Kindly intervene this.