Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

reproof.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 109 posts

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#51

Post by [deleted] »

htag wrote: post #37
AgentK20 wrote: post #4

I think this is honestly less about the notoriety of .com, and more about the lack of affordable and available domains for startups to purchase. Got a five letter named startup? That’ll cost you tens of thousands of dollars, IF you can even get it. Meanwhile there’s hundreds of gTLDs that you can buy a domain on for $10-$30/yr.

Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth. If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer. It might add to your legitimacy and prestige (even if marginally) and it's an asset that will most likely increase in value over time.

[deleted]

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#52

Post by Salgat »

diceduckmonk wrote: post #48
htag wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth. If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer. It might add to your legitimacy and prestige (even if marginally) and it's an asset that will most likely increase in value over time.

> an asset that will most likely increase in value over time. This is actually a myth. See the changing of hands of sex.com. Also, Domain names are being less important as users stay within apps / content platforms like FB, Instagram and TikTok. Also Google Search and soon ChatGPT.

Reminds me of nissan.com, which is now nearly worthless because Nissan Motors doesn't care anymore.

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#53

Post by htag »

diceduckmonk wrote: post #48
htag wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth. If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer. It might add to your legitimacy and prestige (even if marginally) and it's an asset that will most likely increase in value over time.

> an asset that will most likely increase in value over time. This is actually a myth. See the changing of hands of sex.com. Also, Domain names are being less important as users stay within apps / content platforms like FB, Instagram and TikTok. Also Google Search and soon ChatGPT.

The future value of domain names aren't certain, but I think they are a fairly safe bet. They are viewed in to email addresses, search results, web address bars, and hyperlinks. I don't think a platform is going to usurp these. Walled gardens have been attempting to do this since AOL keywords.

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#54

Post by missingdays »

htag wrote: post #37
AgentK20 wrote: post #4

I think this is honestly less about the notoriety of .com, and more about the lack of affordable and available domains for startups to purchase. Got a five letter named startup? That’ll cost you tens of thousands of dollars, IF you can even get it. Meanwhile there’s hundreds of gTLDs that you can buy a domain on for $10-$30/yr.

Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth. If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer. It might add to your legitimacy and prestige (even if marginally) and it's an asset that will most likely increase in value over time.

Why would having .com domain add any prestige?

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#55

Post by vlunkr »

diceduckmonk wrote: post #48
htag wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth. If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer. It might add to your legitimacy and prestige (even if marginally) and it's an asset that will most likely increase in value over time.

> an asset that will most likely increase in value over time. This is actually a myth. See the changing of hands of sex.com. Also, Domain names are being less important as users stay within apps / content platforms like FB, Instagram and TikTok. Also Google Search and soon ChatGPT.

Makes sense. Nobody just blindly navigates to a domain name. You either know it for sure or you search.

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#56

Post by unglaublich »

missingdays wrote: post #54
htag wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth. If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer. It might add to your legitimacy and prestige (even if marginally) and it's an asset that will most likely increase in value over time.

Why would having .com domain add any prestige?

Because there's only one. It's like a bunch of Chinese restaurants fighting over the name 'CN Wall', but there's only one that'll be able to hold 'cnwall.com'.

(~$5k).

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#58

Post by HideousKojima »

Salgat wrote: post #52
diceduckmonk wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> an asset that will most likely increase in value over time. This is actually a myth. See the changing of hands of sex.com. Also, Domain names are being less important as users stay within apps / content platforms like FB, Instagram and TikTok. Also Google Search and soon ChatGPT.

Reminds me of nissan.com, which is now nearly worthless because Nissan Motors doesn't care anymore.

Or steam.com

Re: More than half of YC startups don't have a dot com

#60

Post by klabb3 »

htag wrote: post #37
AgentK20 wrote: post #4

I think this is honestly less about the notoriety of .com, and more about the lack of affordable and available domains for startups to purchase. Got a five letter named startup? That’ll cost you tens of thousands of dollars, IF you can even get it. Meanwhile there’s hundreds of gTLDs that you can buy a domain on for $10-$30/yr.

Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth. If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer. It might add to your legitimacy and prestige (even if marginally) and it's an asset that will most likely increase in value over time.

> Having a dotcom is a signal of the organization's wealth.

The pricing of .com domains is extremely uneven, depending on your name. It could be $20.

> legitimacy and prestige

Since it’s semantically equivalent to other TLDs, it lies entirely in the eye of the beholder. This non-.com ickiness seems to be an outdated US-centric perspective, never heard of it elsewhere. The rest of the world are used to other TLDs, and some (say ai, io, app) indicate other positive business values.

> If your company is worth $3B, and your cash position is good, spending 0.01% of your valuation on a dotcom ($300k) is a no brainer.

So an established company should switch domain name and you’re not factoring in the cost of that? Or they should just have the .com on the side (but then how will the majority of your customers know about your state of the art .com domain)? Or should startups buy a $300k domain upfront?

Post reply on HN