Google has created many blunders (e.g. “miserable failure” now points to stories that describe how Google’s search engine censors the internet and/or overrides their *purported* algorithmic results), so it would not amaze me to lean that Google’s algorithm would contain such ludicrous nonsense as treating .COM domains as if they were more reliable source of information (such as a shopper who says “Macy’s is always better than Bloomingdales”).

Note, however, that .COM is *actually* among the *most* risky domains on the globe.

Apart from TLD considerations, it is the *KEYWORDS* that people are *looking to find* (e.g. “cars”, “hotels”, “movies”, etc.) that are important. Eventually, “one-size fits-all” search engines will increasingly be replaced by vertical search engines which follow the principle of the “Wisdom of the Language” (see http://gaggle.info/miscellaneous/articles/wisdom-of-the-language )… so a “searcher” searching for a pizza they will no longer need to waste their time with Google, but rather go directly to pizza.com (or pizza.net or pizza.de or whatever — perhaps they will even search for “pepperoni” *across* pizza.* domains?).

Meaninglessstringsofwordsruntogetherlikethis are worthless. That ANY “one-size fits-all” search engine still pays *ANY* attention to these zombie domains is simply due to the fact that these one-size fits-all search engines work basically like the white pages (for those users who *still* do not understand how to navigate the Internet — so basically people who are a little bit slowww ;)…

Monson says

Americans seem to be very focused (almost obsessively) on .COM domain names. There is very litte reason to prefer a .COM domain name over domain names from other registries (apparently, many registries in Northern Europe are far less fraud-infested and/at less risk to cyber-attacks of other kinds).

Still, Americans cling to .COM like Linus clings to his blanket.

This will at some point correct itself, because the irrational exuberance that has led to an over-investment in .COM domain names is not “sustainable”. The bust of 2000/2001 was *NOT* a “dot com” bust: I was simply a “dot” bust. The “dot com” bust is still waiting to happen, and at that point holders of meaningless strings of characters will find that their names are not worth a dime.

However, because people are gullible, they still pay far too high prices for such worthless domains. Note that the “rude awakening” could happen any day — I am surprised it hasn’t happened yet.

To point #5 “you really think telling a domain bidder to bid low is misguided advice?”

Sure out of context telling someone to bid more sounds a bit foolish, but yes that is what I said. Every day I get inquiries offering to buy my premium domains because “you aren’t doing anything with it” or the person has a “great idea” or is “just a college student”. I tend to answer most of my emails, unlike most domain owners who hold these premiums, but my response is generally the same “it’s not for sale”

“I should have told them to take the intial offer? Come on.”
Not what I said. Everyone offers low amounts already. It doesn’t work. Especially with premium domain holders who often don’t even answer emails or phone calls pertaining to selling their domains. If you want to buy, Offer an amount that won’t be easily ignored.

“I doubt anyone who

I think that the domain industry as a whole has done good work with explaining their business to “outsiders” on various domain conferences and blogs already, and there have been some positive articles in newspapers and on television lately. But there is still a very long way to go, as shown by this ill-informed NBC coverage.