Home / Blogs

A Navigation Aid or a Brand TLD? (Part 2 of 2)

So what are the characteristics of a “Brand TLD”?

Please note that by “Brand TLD”, I do not mean gTLDs applied for by brands. I mean TLDs whose registrants tend to use them as their primary site and identity. They have either created themselves as, or have become a brand in the eyes of their registrants. These TLDs tend to be in the minority.

Not only do these TLDs have second level domains that are used as the registrant’s main site, but they also have domains that have been renewed by the same registrant at least three or more times consecutively. More of their domains have associated MX records than Navigational Aid TLDs.

This of course means that many of their registrants are using an email address associated with their domain names; these email addresses are printed on the business cards, and published on ads and websites. As a result, the renewal rates tend to be high, stable and less prone to fluctuations.

Brand TLDs also tend to be the first choice of new registrants; they place a higher value on domain names in a Brand TLD than the same name in a Navigational Aid TLD. As a result, the demand for domain names in Brand TLDs is highly price inelastic. Increases in price will not see a corresponding drop in sales.

When and if the registrant is forced to prioritize, he will drop other domain names in his portfolio, before he even considers dropping his primary one. The pain to change the email address and primary website, is too high of a price to pay.

On the registrar side, the situation is very different. The registrars treat the Brand TLDs as the “must have” set of TLDs on offer, because if they do not, their customers will go elsewhere.

The registries operating Brand TLDs either employ “pull” marketing, and market directly to the target registrants. The channel then simply reacts to the market demand by offering the TLD. These registries treat the registrant as the ultimate customer, and the focus of the marketing efforts; they treat the registrar channel, as a channel, but not the ultimate customer. The registrars in turn, do not face the added cost and burden of actively marketing to the target registrants; the demand is present.

If the Brand TLD provides price discounts, they may find upon closer examination that many of registrars pass none or part of the discount to the registrant as a means to bolster their margin. The retail price is then relatively stable.

These registries may also find that dedicated sales resources for the registrar channel are in fact low ROI investments. Their dollars are better spent on marketing directly to the target registrants or on better customer/tech support. Why? The channel is already incented to sell the domains in the Brand TLD.

Brand TLDs may or may not have a few registrars who sell the bulk of their domains, but they can be assured that these registrars can ill afford to drop their TLD as one of their main offerings. As a result, the Brand TLD’s revenue stream is less volatile and far more predictable.

So which TLDs exhibit more of characteristics of a brand TLD? A good barometer is to look at the secondary market: given the same name in two separate TLDs, which one will fetch a higher price? Which TLD has consistently fetched a higher price than others?

.Com is arguably a Brand TLD. Netsol and then Verisign did not create the “dotcom” brand, certainly not in the early days. But the first mover advantage and lack of choice, created the brand for them, so much so in fact that it became part of our jargon. Remember “dotcom” boom and then the “dotcom” bust?

Many TLDs have been launched on the hopes of displacing .com, but have not succeeded in switching their registrants. The barrier to switch is simply too high for those registrants whose primary site is .com and who use a .com address for their email. Many ccTLDs have successfully established themselves as a Brand TLD within their market. A simple test is to look at the top trafficked websites within that country and estimate what percentage use the ccTLD as their primary address.

However, the majority of the existing gTLDs today are replete with domain names that are simply pointers to other sites. They face the most risk in the next few years.

We expect as many as 1000 gTLDs to enter the market. The balance of power between the registries and registrars will shift. You will see new registrars emerge who will focus on a niche vertical or community, and offer specific services to meet the needs of that market. We call them Vertical Registrars. They are most likely to adopt the Brand gTLDs that best appeals to their core market.

Today, the biggest registrars like GoDadddy have a “Wal-Mart” approach, serving a wide variety of registrants from individuals to businesses, but no specialized services for a given industry vertical. With new gTLDs you will see that change.

There will be highly profitable Vertical Registrars, who intimately know the niche market they are serving. Of the 1000 expected new gTLDs, many will also have a new and inventive value proposition coupled with a very defined addressable market, and the means to reach them. Many of the previously gTLD launched did not have any of these and hence became Navigational Aid TLDs.

The influx of so much supply and choice in a previously restricted market will create competition, and render domain names a commodity, if they are not already one.

So, why wouldn’t all TLDs eventually have the characteristics of a Navigational Aid TLD, if domain names are or become a commodity? If you stood in line or pre-ordered the latest iPhone, you will understand. There is no lack of new smartphones with similar features, some with far lower price tags. Yet Apple is a brand, and its customers demand the iPhone and are willing to pay the premium price.

The new gTLDs most primed for success are the ones who will build a brand with their target market, and treat them as the ultimate customer. The existing gTLDs are best advised to determine if they exhibit the characteristics of a Navigational Aid TLD, and if so either make major changes in their approach while there is still time, or face an uncertain revenue stream in the future.

By Alexa Raad

Architelos provides consulting and managed services for clients applying for new top-level domains, ranging from new TLD application support to launch and turnkey front-end management of a new TLD. She can be reached directly at [email protected].

Visit Page

Filed Under


Speculative nonsense and no evidence to support the argument Frederick Harris  –  Nov 21, 2012 8:13 PM

This entire item is speculative nonsense. I won’t argue about the utility of brand recognition. This entire argument is really about selling potential customers on the questionable value of right-of-the-dot TLDs. There is no difference to a computer , or an end user, none whatsoever, between tools.sears and sears.tools.com where the latter (tools) is a generic SLD that can accommodate all brand names that manufacture “tools”. To the contrary, about 300 or so generic dot-com domains can probably accommodate most the world’s really, really, really important brands, while about 1000 generic SLDs covers almost the entire universe of generally recognized brand names. Check out Ad Age’s annual listing of 1000 world famous brands. If anyone wants to challenge this, please send a comment and an email address and I will demonstrate a fully qualified network of generics that does exactly the same thing as the argument in this item - for about, say, the cost of an annual dot-com SLD, or about $10.00 a year (or less) per domain name. At any rate, the real argument here is about the unproven valorization of gTLD brand name level one names. The author of the item does not have a scintilla of evidence that anything represented by brand name TLD arguments is in fact the case. And to whom do we owe all this in the first place? Out friends at ICANN, of course, rushing like lemmings to the sea into a miasma of crazy domain name speculation and related profits for ICANN and companies represented by the author of the above-mentioned drivel.

True but inertia slows the process Thomas Barrett  –  Nov 23, 2012 7:17 PM

I agree with the point of this article.  Although we need a different label for it, since .brand is already accepted to have another meaning.  I would use .Community if that didn’t already mean something else too.

There does exist evidence that end-users will adopt new TLD’s for branding purposes from the past batches of new TLD’s.  But it takes far longer and greater investment than most expect or budget for. 

There are many examples of this in some of the new gTLD’s, including:
- .aero
- .coop
- .travel

Many of the new TLD’s targeting special-interest groups will follow the same trajectory as the sTLD’s.  If you need some specific examples, then do a google search for “site:.coop” or whatever extension you want to check.

Unfortunately, these namespaces are still small.  The reasons include:
- Inertia of existing addresses.  The target customers who already have an existing address have a lot invested in promoting their address.  The switch can take years.

- Technical compatibility.  Users of new TLD’s, particularly, email address, still encounter websites that do not accept their extension.  ICANN needs to be much more aggressive in this area.

- Raising awareness in the target registrants is expensive and requires the involvement of industry influencers.  The existing sTLD’s had a sponsor to champion their TLD to the target market. 

Looking at the new crop of new gTLD’s, one glaring problem jumps out:  many of the TLD’s that target an industry vertical or special-interest group are lacking a champion with credibility with the target end-users. 

There are way too many TLD applications that are designated as unrestricted and have not identified or enlisted a champion for their targeted vertical or special-interest group.  These TLD’s will have to spend a lot more energy generating demand without the presence of such a champion.

The smart applicants will spend the next few months building their support and their channel, including:

1. Spending the next few months conducting outreach to key industry influencers, such as trade associations and early pioneers.

2. Finding registrars willing to offer specialized solutions for these special-interest groups.  These TLD’s are not well served by the mass-market Registrar channel.  The smart applicants are already getting commitments from Registrars to support their TLD.

3. Building their mailing list of potential registrants.  The awareness raising process should already be underway.

This is no time for applicants to be sitting on the bench.  This is true even if the TLD is in contention.

Comment Title:

  Notify me of follow-up comments

We encourage you to post comments and engage in discussions that advance this post through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can report it using the link at the end of each comment. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of CircleID. For more information on our comment policy, see Codes of Conduct.

CircleID Newsletter The Weekly Wrap

More and more professionals are choosing to publish critical posts on CircleID from all corners of the Internet industry. If you find it hard to keep up daily, consider subscribing to our weekly digest. We will provide you a convenient summary report once a week sent directly to your inbox. It's a quick and easy read.

I make a point of reading CircleID. There is no getting around the utility of knowing what thoughtful people are thinking and saying about our industry.

Co-designer of the TCP/IP Protocols & the Architecture of the Internet



IPv4 Markets

Sponsored byIPv4.Global

Threat Intelligence

Sponsored byWhoisXML API

Domain Names

Sponsored byVerisign

New TLDs

Sponsored byRadix

Brand Protection

Sponsored byCSC


Sponsored byVerisign


Sponsored byDNIB.com