DomainersMagazine.com

CircleID: As the roll out of FttH remains a slow process, it is no wonder that more and more people are looking towards mobile as a potential alternative.

Obviously, mobile communication has improved over recent years in providing excellent access to broadband; and it has also become more affordable. At the same time, there is the fabulous hype about 5G, and the PR and media machines of the vendors involved make you believe that this will become a real competitor to the slow moving FttH developments.

First of all, anybody who has started to use video-based media over mobile networks seriously — beyond Facebook, YouTube, etc. — will have noticed that you will very quickly run out of the download capacity that is included in your mobile phone package, and any serious video use over mobile networks will quickly run into hundreds of dollars per month.

Secondly, 5G as a viable commercial mass market alternative might be 10 and possibly even 15 years away.

For starters, there is still not a 5G standard, and this is essential for vendors to provide devices for mass markets in order to deliver an affordable device. Totally new handsets are needed to facilitate the multiple tiny antennas that are required in order for the device to operate over the high frequency necessary for 5G. No mass market will be achievable without a standard for such devices.

Secondly, 5G will require access to a fibre optic backbone in order to provide the affordable high-speed services that are talked about by the vendors and the mobile operators alike. Currently, in most western economies, not much more than 50% of mobile towers are currently linked to fibre optic networks — 5G could require a hundred-fold increase in mobile base stations and most of them need to be linked to a fibre optic network.

For the service to deliver the promised quality to the end-users, a fibre optic connection to the 5G base station is needed within 100 meters of where the actual 5G users are. Furthermore, as soon as one starts talking about offices, public buildings, cafes, etc. the reality is that the fibre network will need to be brought into these buildings in order to provide a reliable service. 5G has significant problems penetrating walls, foliage, water, even people (which from a spectrum perspective are seen as big bubbles of water). So in order to provide 5G services in these places multiple 5G antennas are needed within rooms to enable access to the mobile services.

When comparing wireless to fibre it is also important to note that, while wireless has a very limited capacity to carry lots of data over any distance (e.g., 100 metres for 5G), fibre can carry enormous amounts of data over tens of kilometres. So, from a network efficiency point of view fibre-based infrastructure will always win over wireless.

As we have said in many of our articles over the last decade, mobile infrastructure and fibre infrastructure are both essential. It is not a case of either/or. But in the end, mobile services will just provide local access linked to a fibre optic infrastructure. In other words, the majority of infrastructure needed to deliver 5G will be based on an FttH — or at least FttC (Fibre to the Curb) — infrastructure.

It is obvious that for these reasons it is impossible for the industry to deliver mass market 5G services within the short and even the medium term; so a 10-year horizon for such a level of 5G penetration is far more realistic.

Surely, in relation to mobile broadband being an alternative to FttH — as is the case at the moment — mobile broadband will increase its position at the bottom end of the market, for those people with very basic broadband access requirements. At the most, this might be sufficient for around 15% of the market.

However, at the same time, the overall content requirements for 'bandwidth-sucking' applications will continue in areas like entertainment, as well as in education, healthcare, business, smart cities, smart grids, smart buildings and so on.

FttH/FttC will potentially also benefit the development of 5G, depending on mobile operators being able to get affordable wholesale access to that network. It would be rather silly if the various mobile operators were also forced to bring their fibres to the curb in parallel with the fixed telcos in order to deliver 5G services.

So don't expect a rapid development of 5G services for the mass market. 5G will most likely be installed in pockets where there is a clear business case (for a premium service) and where there is plenty of fibre available to provide a fast and reliable service.

On the other hand, 5G could also be a catalyst for the development of wholesale based FttH/FttC networks. But chances are that regulations to enable national wholesale based fibre optic networks will not be swiftly forthcoming; some of the mobile operators will not wait for that and will extend their own fibre backbones; if the latter is the case, the economic viability of fixed telco based FttH networks will even further diminish.
Written by Paul Budde, Managing Director of Paul Budde CommunicationFollow CircleID on TwitterMore under: Broadband, Mobile, Wireless

The post The Role of FttH in the Development of 5G appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.

Domain Name Wire: Instra acquisition accounts for company’s growth last year. Domain name company CentralNic (AIM: CNIC) reported earnings for 2016 this morning. The company grew its top line and Adjusted EBITDA significantly, with almost all of the growth coming from its acquisition of domain name registrar Instra at the beginning of 2016. Revenue increased £11.74 million to […]
The post CentralNic reports 2016 earnings and growth driven by Instra appeared first on Domain Name Wire | Domain Name News & Views.

The post CentralNic reports 2016 earnings and growth driven by Instra appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.

CircleID: Part 2: How do I choose the right option for my brand? In my previous article, I discussed the question of how to represent .brand domains in advertising.

As you can imagine, it's a balancing act — stimulating awareness of the domain, creating the desired customer behavior of the future using .brands, whilst ensuring that we are considerate to the fact that .brands are yet to hit mainstream awareness. Sounds simple right?

As you may recall, the first article outlined a few key options that we've considered in our discussions with clients.

While all of these options have their advantages and disadvantages, the process for selecting the right approach for presenting your .brand in your advertising can be boiled down to two key factors: the advertising medium and the desired customer behavior.

Medium

As a marketer, you'll be aiming to select the best possible medium, or range of mediums to execute your campaign with the maximum impact. In today's world, you'll have dozens of options, and the balance of the mix will be vital.

Specifically for the .brand, one of the most obvious factors to consider is to consider whether the domain will be spoken aloud (such as on radio), read visually (such as in print or digital), a combination of spoken and read (such as on television) or clicked (such as social media).

Audio media relies heavily on clear, uncomplicated information that can be processed easily. The other unique feature of audio media such as a radio advertisement is that audiences often hear them at a time when they're not able to take immediate action — such as while they're driving — making recall a very important factor. Without visuals to reinforce the message, the call to action needs to be memorable and simple enough that a listener can remember and follow instructions at a later time.

Obviously audio media discounts any of the visual options for displaying .brands, such as using symbols or more complex options like using http:// which are also likely to be unsuitable. In this instance, a combination of a call to action such as "find us at" or "visit our website at", followed by a domain with or without the 'www' can be a simple way to convey the message.

Visual media allows for more options of presentation with the introduction of symbols. However, when presented in a visual format such as a print or digital ad, too much text is likely to drive designers mad and the aesthetic appeal of the call to action becomes much more important. In this medium, simple is better, and for this reason, we tend to favor the www or the use of a symbol that would clearly indicate a digital call to action.

Click based presentations of domains can be overshadowed by the prevalence of rich image previews which tend to be more visually attractive to the user than the placed URL — which in some cases may be obfuscated. However, we strongly believe that where possible, the .brand should be presented to reinforce the usage of the .brand and build consistent and potentially sub conscious awareness of the .brand itself.

Desired customer behavior

Regardless of the creative execution of your advertisement, there will be an objective tied to it that outlines a key behavior you want audiences to take once they've been exposed to the ad. Historically, this could include calling a particular number, coming in store, typing in a web address, downloading an app or clicking on a digital ad.

One important question when using your .brand to convey a message is: do I want my audience to react immediately, or will recall of the domain for later use be required? The former is likely more applicable for example in digital ads where you want someone to click through — whereas recall may be more important for traditional advertising methods such as radio or television where the brand may be hoping that the client recalls the message, or acts at a later time.

It's not (yet) an exact art

While some of this sounds like Advertising 101, the nature of new technologies like .brand domains is that they require rethinking the 'old rules' to make sure they still fit with the tools and the audiences of today. The advantage .brand owners now have is that this is a namespace they control entirely; meaning they can easily create domains, create 'backups' to cover mistypes or incorrectly-recalled domains, and 'try out' these approaches on any part of their business they wish.

More importantly, regardless of the medium or the domain chosen — these brands can begin to reduce their reliance on third parties such as social or search for their traffic, by creating calls-to-action that get audience directly where they need to be and build more meaningful connections with customers.

That's a goal well worth pursuing if you ask me.

A version of this post was originally published on MakeWay.World.
Written by Tony Kirsch, Head of Professional Services at NeustarFollow CircleID on TwitterMore under: Domain Names, Intellectual Property, Top-Level Domains

The post How Should I Present .Brand Domains in Advertising? (Part 2) appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.

dotWeekly: Welcome to Domain Movers! We keep track of corporate domain name transactions and report the early findings to you. These discoveries often lead to new brands, products, services, domain upgrades, advertising efforts and much more!
This is really a tiny sample of daily activity of domain names related to businesses but I feel it’s important to highlight at least some, which result in these reports. Today’s report took me 4 hours, 53 minutes to compile. Enjoy!
Tucows has sold Tarbox.com… Read the rest
Domain Movers: EchoShow.com, SE.com + MoreJamie Zoch

The post Domain Movers: EchoShow.com, SE.com + More appeared first on iGoldRush Domain News and Resources.