But I believe there is tremendous value in the .ORG version, particularly for resale purposes. I have sold several GEO.org domains to end users for substantial prices because the company or organization is looking for that trust factor and they simply can’t afford or get their hands on the .COM’s which are mostly unubtainable at this point (for good ones).

I recently acquired NorthProvidence.org and have already recieved 2 offers on it. Nothing I would accept, but still shows considerable interest. I will develop this one and see what happens. Report back later…

But dot-com is a mature extension and won’t fill future naming needs, whereas ccTLDs are still young, legit as a class of names worldwide, and next in line for mass popularity, not .net, .org. or other silly extensions. In fact .us is the world’s top selling extension right now says Verisign in their June/09 report i think. So .us is in line for a double, from global ccTLD growth/gTLD spillage and from the anomaly that .us market penetration is so/artificially low right now.

Meanwhile it’s wrong when talking geodomains to downplay ccTLDs; they ARE geo. Fact that .us has some growth in front of it to match dot-com mindshare doesn’t alter this fact. Cheers,

Thanks for the well thought out comment. You mentioned that people email you thinking you are a government-run entity (I get that too) which leads me to ask if you have your domain names developed. If so, how comprehensive are your sites, and if not, how do people find your email addresses?

I agree that there is a trust factor, and many cities’ CVB operate on the city (or other variation) .org.

I also agree that category defining .org domain names will probably increase in value over time, but I think that .coms will increase at a much greater rate.

Overall, it looks like you’ve had some great successes, so I am glad that your vision is now in online real estate!

Are these names as good as .com. No. Not maybe, not kinda, not sorta of. They are not. Having said that and in all due respect to those who believe strongly in .com’s, I could live off these .orgs, all though I do not need to. My humble experience is that a lot of people actually trust .orgs, for whatever reason. What the .org registry proclaims, in my experience is true. I cannot tell you how many e-mails I get from people all over the world who think one of my .orgs are government related, and ask about everything from garbage collection to someones dog crapping on their lawn. They are typing in these addresses and they are clicking even in this environment.

If I can elaborate on something, which I draw a very related parallel. I am not trying to boast or anything like that, so please do not take this the wrong way. I was in the communication business, starting in the early 60′s. I needed tower sites. Most of the highest points on the mountains were taken by AT&T, just like the good .com’s are taken now. A friend told me not to worry. He said AT&T had already done the hard work and found the best sites, just work out in all radials to find the closest land available for sale. I did, and bought up over 48 pieces of what was to become prime communication tower facilities which I sold for millions in my late 20′s. Try buying tower sites now and then when you get one, try getting approval to build it. Hold you hand right on your a-s. Good luck.

Then I got my first television license. It was on a high number channel which laid fallow for years. Everyone laughed because it wasn’t as good as the lower channel numbers because of propagation characteristics and cost to run. The other guys would “eat me alive”. Yet there were only so many television channels available in America. Period. Just like .com’s, .net’s, and .org’s, if one assumes they might be the most sought after. At 34 I sold the piece of paper for many more millions. All those who laughed did what one might expect losers to do. They went back under the holes.

So, in conclusion. Do I wish I had .com versions? Sure I do. But anyone who says .nets. or .orgs are no good is full of crap right up to their ears. Take that for what it is worth.