Few people know about them, but they like the idea of more choice.
The Domain Name Association (DNA) released results of a survey this morning designed to understand consumer sentiment toward domain names, and especially new top level domain names.
DNA is very much an advocacy group for the adoption of new top level domain names, yet I found its survey to be fair about the challenges to collecting data about new TLDs and its question methodology.
A lot of the questions were hypothetical about which site you’d visit, offering a number of identical second level domains with varying top level domains. For example, for the question “Where would you go to pay bills online?”:
Each of the questions like this included .com, the local ccTLD and four new TLD options (many of which aren’t available yet). I wonder how the results would have differed if the survey used just one new TLD per survey-taker. In other words, with 67% of the choices new TLDs, did this bias answers to new TLD choices in aggregate?
Still, the answer to the above question is rather interesting. It shows a definite interest in .secure compared to other TLDs (especially .bank) when it comes to something that people want to do securely. I’d be really curious to see how people would answer this question comparing just new TLD choices. If anyone wants to underwrite that, I’d be happy to look at leading a study on it.
Another hypothetical asked “Where would you buy shoes if you lived in Melbourne?” and Australian survey respondents said:
While this might look good for geo domains, I don’t think this question has much value. It’s much like using the same term searched for in Google on an Adwords landing page: people see the similarity and are more likely to convert. I imagine that’s what happened for these questions.
The report showed that awareness of new top level domain names is rather low, and I think most people will agree with that. In fact, the DNA survey probably overshoots awareness by saying 25% are aware of expansion of TLDs. The report notes that this is likely due to the subset of users who took the survey. (There were anomalies in answers to this question, including about a 15% “yes” answer in the U.S. and 70% in Mexico, a difference that can’t easily be explained.)
I also wonder if this question was asked at the beginning of the survey or after people had already answered lots of questions about new TLDs.
Respondents also indicated they’d like more choice when it comes to domain names, but I rarely see people say they don’t want more choice in anything.
One result that should delight everyone in the domain name industry is a question about search vs. typing in domain names. While search beats typing in domain names, 35% say they navigate most often by typing domain names directly into the browser. 85% say they type domain names in at least part of the time.
DNA members received a complete data set of the survey; the subset report is available on DNA’s website (pdf).
Joe Mahoney says
I can help explain the anomalies in Mexico: .MX is highly favored in Mexico these days over .COM whereas .COM strongly identifies with Wordwide/U.S. markets. So people would be aware of the different extensions there, whereas U.S. users are traditionally unfamiliar with anything but .COM. Even .NET has low awareness in the U.S. The survey tells us everything we already know, domain hacks are great, everything else is sketchy. How many relevant domain hacks can you make? My favorite part is where they survey takers think that they can still get great ‘short’ web addresses with new gTLDs. Plenty of .BIZ domains out there if you are looking for that. Just more fodder and spin here.
Andrew Allemann says
Joe, I don’t think that explains the anomaly. The number in Germany was even lower than the US (sub 10%), and .de is dominant there.
Christopher Hofman Laursen says
It is an interesting study, which at least confirmed that .com loyalty is so much higher in the US than in any other country. Much of the debate .com vs. new gTLDs come from the US, and it would be great with a more nuanced, glocal view in the future.
As you also mentioned the survey was not perfect. They asked Australians one question (“Where would you buy shoes if you lived in Melbourne?”) and the US respondents another (“Where would you buy shoes?”), and tried to compare the two. No wonder that shoes.melbourne got a 33% preference while shoes.nyc got 2.8%.
Anyway, there were some good findings and a foundation for other planning to do similar studies. We actually just did one of the same questions for a UK survey to compare results. Will be posted on our blog shortly.
Joseph Peterson says
It’s true that .COM is much more dominant in the USA than elsewhere. Mainly that’s because ccTLD awareness is very low among Americans, who don’t identify with or even encounter .US.
Americans are seldom if ever prompted to visit a foreign local site, and their go-to websites (whether local or global) tend to be built on established gTLDs like .COM and .ORG.
This experience is utterly unlike that of a European, who cannot travel very far before he’s in a new country with a separate language and websites distributed over a different ccTLD.
Even in the UK, Canada, or Australia, there is for consumers an observable distinction between the local ccTLD-based sites and international (perhaps American) sites built on .COM.
The problem with suggesting that we need a global view of the nTLDs is that they are overwhelmingly slanted toward English keywords and the American market. It’s inevitable that much of the debate will focus there.
Usually it’s the registries themselves that play up the beyond-.COM sales pitch. And that antithesis, that rationale is itself a bit U.S.-centric, since it presumes the .COM landscape characteristic of the USA and leaves out ccTLDs almost entirely.
Not only is the U.S. domain market larger than that found in most other countries; nTLDs face an extra layer of competition from ccTLDs in other countries – a layer not present in the USA. Registries know this keenly; so they emphasize a U.S.-centric sales pitch, with the predictable result that the debate is staged in America.
Christopher Hofman Laursen says
I read that half of the world’s domain names are actually registered within the US, so it’s obvious that the debate about new gTLDs mostly comes from the US. And it’s also obvious that it’s mostly negative due to the faith in .com. The growth of the new gTLDs will come from other regional areas – especially Asia. As the DNA study clearly indicated .com is only one of many choices outside the US. Our own UK survey showed that while co.uk was the most preferred, actually the no. 2 by margin was a new gTLD and .com only came in as no. 3. ( a meagre 16.6%)
Joseph Peterson says
How many questions were asked in your UK study? Just 2?
Christopher Hofman Laursen says
Yes, I just wanted to confirm the validity of some questions from the DNA study, and I got the same answers as they did.
Andrew Allemann says
Where did you run the survey? Who was your audience? How many people?
europeandomaincentre says
Via Google Surveys. 500 UK internet users from 18 to +65 distributed all across Britain
Andrew Allemann says
Will you share the actual question and answer options?
europeandomaincentre says
You can find them at the bottom of my latest post blog.europeandomaincentre.com/domain-endings-users-trust/
Joseph Peterson says
Interesting