News
Written by Michael Gilmour , Tuesday, 04 March 2008
I just received some interesting information from Domain Sponsor where they are announcing a promotion to entice more traffic into their network.
Written by Michael Gilmour , Tuesday, 04 March 2008
This article immediately follows on from the previous articles on "Search" that were inspired from a talk at DomainFest by author John Battelle. For the past few years one of my businesses has been working on this very problem. We developed a system that delivers content that users have requested directly to their desktops. This solution primarily used RSS feeds to solve the massive content scale and provided levels of customer interaction. For example, users could vote on each RSS channel as to whether they thought it was any good or not, thereby providing feedback for other users on the quality of each channel being added. The business model was developed from our experience with domains and involved inserting PPC advertisements between RSS content. This generated some money but not the massive amounts that we had initially hoped for. Ultimately where we wanted to head was in behavioural or psychographical targeting of advertisements to meet the specific needs of each individual user. This level of customization is tantalizingly close to our grasp. After a number of years of working on and off the project we decided to shelve it for a time as other developmental priorities and opportunities became available. I envisage that it won’t be long until we get back to testing other solutions to crack this tough nut! The single biggest challenge that we experienced in developing the dialogue/database system was building something that users enjoyed. Even though a system works it doesn’t necessarily mean that people will use it. The conclusion that we came to was that dialoguing takes time and people are time poor. This doesn’t mean that we’ve completed given up on experimenting with the concept, on the contrary, more thought is going into it each day. I personally believe that John Battelle was right in promoting a dialogue with customers but our experience doing this on a massive scale across multiple market verticals is not a trivial exercise. I do believe that once solved it could potentially transform our industry. For example, let’s imagine that you have a domain that receives 100 users per day and that 1% of them sign-up for a database driven "dialoging service". At day 100 you have exactly 100 users in the service and still 100 potentially new users coming to your domain each day. At day 200 you have 200 users in the database and 100 to the domain. It’s not long before you realize that if you could monetize those users at the same rate as the domain then you’ll be in the money in a major way. Here are a few other side benefits. You could sell your domain at some point and live off the revenue from the users. This is like having your cake and eating it to! Trademark infringing domains could throw off users which are now no longer infringing on the trademark. This is like "laundering money" except you are now "laundering users". Clean users from potentially dirty traffic. If anyone is interested in talking to me about our experiences in what we have developed to date then please don’t hesitate to contact me. In the meantime, I think that I might listen to John’s book once again. Nothing like being challenged in the thinking! Articles in the series: Search and John Battelle – Part 1 – The Inspiration, Search and John Battelle – Part 2 Amazon Link to Book: The Search: How Google and Its Rivals Rewrote the Rules of Business and Transformed Our Culture Source: Posted by Michael Gilmour — Original post on on Whizzbangsblog — March 3, 2008
Written by Caycee Boyce , Tuesday, 04 March 2008
Few months ago I wrote about a number of domain mining techniques. The subject is a lifelong fascination of mine (since I’ve gotten in the domain business) with no shortage of material in sight. If you’re a website owner the following will explore possible ways of which may result in you losing traffic to various URL’s. If you are a domain owner the following may serve as mining opportunities – finding variation of domain names to gain traffic. Letter dropping Description: Take one letter off the original domain. Original: Domain.com Typos: domain.com, dmain.com, doain.com, etc QWERTY Typos Description: Each letter on the QWERTY keyboard is surrounded by other keys, letters. In many instances we press on keys next to the one we originally intended to. Original: Domain.com Typos: Dlmain.com, Dimain.com, Dpmain.com, etc English/American spelling Description: Some words are written differently between American and English languages. Example below. Original keyword: “Color†American spelling with extension: Color.com English Speliing: with extension Colour.com Extension typos Description: Dropping or mixing letters of the URL extension. A famous case is the Cameroon’s .CM case. Original: Domain.com Typos: Domain.Cm, Domain.Co, Domain.Om Dyslexia Description: Since Dyslexia is related to the written language/spelling, it is directly related to typing in keywords in the URL bar. Original: Original.com Typo: Origunsl.com Jumble Visual Description: Mixing letters, usually the result of fast typing or bad habits. Original: Domain.com Typos: Dmoain.com, Doamin.com, Domian.com, etc Associations/Similar words Description: This is a huge traffic leakage issue, possibly the biggest of them all. Many people who wants to reach a brand name, for example SmithMemorial.com, will actually type SmithFuneralHomes.com or FuneralHomes.com, because they remember the association rather then the brand name (Volume/Value issue). This goes all day long across the web and is responsible for many millions of traffic leakage a day. This is also one of the most important reasons why ownership of generic domains, in addition to your brand name, is a smart and sound proposition. Original: GreatDomainNames.com Variation: BestDomainNames.com, GreatDomains.com, BestDomains.com, GreatNames.com, etc. Extensions Description: Simply put, some will check other extensions using your brand name to try to reach you. Original: Domain.com Variation: Domain.net Mixed words Description: Related to associations point above, some will remember your keywords but will mix them up, resulting in losing traffic. Original: DogTraining.com Variation: TrainingDog.com Generic Thinking Description: see related post here. Original: GreatFood.com Variation: Food.com Missing Dot Syndrome Description: Users forget the dot after WWW resulting in them visiting a completely different URL. My friend Jessica Bookstaff says: "People mistakenly miss the dot as in wwwdomain.com. When you type that into your browser, the browser of course thinks you want www.wwwdomain.com – an entirely different url… " Source: Posted on The Conceptualist by Sahar Sahid — Reprinted with permission — March 3, 2008
Written by Caycee Boyce , Monday, 03 March 2008
The development of Global Internet Number Resource Policies is the subject of an MoU between ASO/NRO and ICANN. There are also specific ICANN Board Procedures for handling global policy proposals in this context. The Board procedures also state that the Board can request ICANN staff to undertake an “early awareness†tracking of proposals for global policies under development in the addressing community. At its meeting on 20 November 2007, the Board resolved to request such tracking of the development of a global policy proposal for allocation of Autonomous System Numbers, or ASNs, that is already well advanced towards adoption in the Regional Internet Registries, or RIRs. The status overview presented below is compiled in response to this request and will be timely updated as developments proceed, for information to ICANN entities and the wider community. Status Overview The table below indicates the current status within each RIR for the proposed Global Policy for ASNs. Hyperlinks are included for easy access. The proposal was originally presented at the RIPE-54 meeting in March 2007. It formalizes the current procedure and gives a policy basis for the transition from 2-byte (16 bits) to 4-byte (32 bits) ASNs. The proposal has been introduced in all RIRs, following their respective policy development processes, and has now been adopted by all RIRs. The proposal will next be handled by the NRO EC and the ASO AC according to their procedures before being submitted to the ICANN Board for ratification. The proposal has been formally recognized by the ASO AC as a global policy proposal in the sense of the ASO MoU, i.e. focusing on address allocation from IANA to the RIRs. To view the informational table, click here. Source: ICANN Announcement – March 3, 2008
Results 226 – 234 of 242
