http://www.identityworks.com/forum/identity-strategy/from-brandcom-to-conbrand/ Just another WordPress weblog Thu, 17 May 2012 03:32:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 http://www.identityworks.com/forum/identity-strategy/from-brandcom-to-conbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-199703 Dan Dimmock Sat, 17 Sep 2011 16:21:10 +0000 http://www.identityworks.com/forum/?p=468#comment-199703 RT <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/Interbrand/status/114061734611910656" rel="nofollow">@Interbrand</a> (via <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/brandchannelhub" rel="nofollow">@brandchannelhub</a>) White Paper: <strong>'The pros and cons of a "dotbrand" url'</strong> - <a href="http://bit.ly/oqqnw5" rel="nofollow">bit.ly/oqqnw5</a> - #<a href="http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23NewTLDs" rel="nofollow">NewTLDs</a>    RT @Interbrand (via @brandchannelhub)
White Paper: ‘The pros and cons of a “dotbrand” url’ - bit.ly/oqqnw5 - #NewTLDs 
 

]]> http://www.identityworks.com/forum/identity-strategy/from-brandcom-to-conbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-193436 Josh Nychuk Sat, 06 Aug 2011 21:16:32 +0000 http://www.identityworks.com/forum/?p=468#comment-193436 So apparently organisations have been lobbying for years to bring this into effect, so we can't entirely say ICANN is creating a problem — only to make money off solving that problem. Before brands even consider the complex application process they have to assess how this fits with their architecture. If this is not improving functionality or aiding users in accessing more relevant content, then I think organisations should at least consider how they could more effectively use their time and resources.  Considering the costs associated with this move, the organisations lobbying for gTLD's have money to burn and are essentially doing this as an investment in vanity and ego. If I am wrong and this will greatly improve our web experience and how we access content then please let me know. So apparently organisations have been lobbying for years to bring this into effect, so we can’t entirely say ICANN is creating a problem — only to make money off solving that problem. Before brands even consider the complex application process they have to assess how this fits with their architecture. If this is not improving functionality or aiding users in accessing more relevant content, then I think organisations should at least consider how they could more effectively use their time and resources. 
Considering the costs associated with this move, the organisations lobbying for gTLD’s have money to burn and are essentially doing this as an investment in vanity and ego. If I am wrong and this will greatly improve our web experience and how we access content then please let me know.

]]> http://www.identityworks.com/forum/identity-strategy/from-brandcom-to-conbrand/comment-page-1/#comment-187954 David Airey Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:17:27 +0000 http://www.identityworks.com/forum/?p=468#comment-187954 I'm emailed regularly by hucksters telling me someone's trying to acquire the .asia, .cn, .in, .hk, etc. domains for my .com, and that in order to prevent them from doing so I should purchase the extensions first. What a scam. From a small-time business viewpoint like mine, all I bother with is the .com (my main site) and the .co.uk (where I'm based). I’m emailed regularly by hucksters telling me someone’s trying to acquire the .asia, .cn, .in, .hk, etc. domains for my .com, and that in order to prevent them from doing so I should purchase the extensions first. What a scam. From a small-time business viewpoint like mine, all I bother with is the .com (my main site) and the .co.uk (where I’m based).

]]>