The new domain names that will be a game-changer for brands

Applications for a new generation of internet domain names open in the new year that aim to revolutionise search and beef up security. Can brands afford not to join the party?


’Dotbrand’ might sound like yet another buzzword, but in less than three months it could have a significant impact on a brand’s digital strategy because it offers marketers the opportunity to graft an additional domain name onto their organisation’s web address and enhance both its SEO strategy and defence against online counterfeit operations.

Deloitte, Canon, Hitachi, Motorola and Unicef have already said that they want to file for a .brand address, also known as a generic top level domain (gTLD). If successful, that would allow Canon, for example, to register .canon as a domain name.

Although the $185,000 (£118,000) cost of applying for a .brand domain name and yearly running costs of up to $200,000 (£127,500) may appear prohibitive, global brands cannot afford to ignore this opportunity because the open nature of the new gTLDs - allowing for the registration of common words and brand names - means there is likely to be a whole new way of surfing the web from the end of next year.

In much the same way that many consumers simply type what they are looking for into a search engine rather than remembering a URL, .brand domains will essentially allow a brand name to become an entire web address, giving the brand owner freedom to create its own sub-domains.

For example, if McDonald’s was to register .mcdonalds as a new domain, it could also open up countless sub-domains such as,,, down to individual store locations such as Individual store managers could even have their own page, with their name ahead of the .mcdonalds domain.

In the case of a department store or online retailer, brands could even issue customers their own pages, opening the way for real personalisation opportunities.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) - which is running the application process - is highlighting such uses as one of the main benefits of .brand. It claims that owning their domain names will give brands unprecedented control over their web presence, while getting even closer to customers all in the name of loyalty and engagement.

Not only could .brand enhance a brand’s SEO strategy with greater connections to relevant search terms, but it could also help in the fight against online fraudsters, who set up fake websites, and cybersquatters.

These online defences against counterfeit operations should be top of mind for those considering whether .brand is worth the investment, according to Simon Briskman, digital specialist and partner at law firm Field Fisher Waterhouse. “Counterfeiters will still be out there, but in time I think the new domain names will give brands an absolute stamp of authenticity,” he says.

Trademark protection

But for the growing list of brands to publicly announce their intention to file for a .brand domain, which also includes cities such as London and Berlin (see Dotbrand: What brands are doing so far, far right), protecting their brand trademark is just a small part of why they want to get involved.

Many interested parties cite increased audience accessibility and communications as the reasons for their interest in .brand. Indeed, Deloitte specifically sees it as a way to reflect its ideals of innovation and being a market leader.

Not only could .brand enhance a brand’s SEO strategy with greater connections to relevant search terms, but it could also help in the fight against online fraudsters

Deloitte online communications leader Bill Barrett explains: “Some of the aspects are unknown, but being a first mover has risks and great rewards. It aligns with Deloitte’s positioning around being innovative and one step ahead.” (see Viewpoint, below)

Barrett says the professional services firm is conducting a thorough cost/benefit analysis, and that there is support all round for the potential value it could bring to the business. He adds that businesses should understand the implications of their competitors having a .brand domain and that companies that have been abreast of developments from the beginning will have the upper hand.

The success of .brand will also rely on consumer take-up of this new way to browse the web. However, there are further promising insights for .brand, with 60% of consumers saying they simply type a brand name into a search engine and only 25% saying they remember website addresses, according to a YouGov poll run last month for consultancy Melbourne IT.

Additionally, 85% agreed that companies should help consumers to distinguish between real and counterfeit sites - something .brand has potential to alleviate.

Icann will not be running a marketing campaign to inform consumers of the change so the onus will be on brands to educate their audiences, which is one of the reasons why Deloitte’s Barrett says it will feature its new .deloitte domains heavily in marketing collateral. This will follow the pattern of Facebook pages and Twitter hashtags featuring in current advertising campaigns, he adds.

Icann chief executive Rod Beckstrom insists his organisation is there to establish the guidelines and oversee the application process, rather than push benefits of the new scheme. And it will be up to companies to educate consumers about new ways to find them online.

“The introduction of a .brand domain is almost like a logo change, and new marketing will need to be done,” he says. “But I think word will spread pretty fast. You are talking about some pretty major entities in the world that will have their name after the dot and their collective marketing power greatly exceeds that of Icann.”

Icann vice-president of communications and marketing Barbara Ann Clay warns that companies should carefully weigh up the risks of taking a .brand domain name because these will also be different for different businesses.

“A brand should have a creative in-house team that can take this and run with it,” she says. “There are many risks involved that all need to be considered, but innovation is at the core of great marketing.”

Innovation is certainly a brand characteristic Deloitte is hoping to leverage through its .brand strategy, but Barrett acknowledges that if the risks began to outweigh the benefits it would withdraw from the application process.

“There is always the chance that we could end up at a point where we might not be able to justify the investment costs,” he says. “But we see a lot of potential value in it so far, and I think our competitors do too.”



Bill Barrett, online communications leader, Deloitte

We started looking at filing for a .brand address several years ago and when it was confirmed last autumn we put it into high gear. We are doing a full assessment of the opportunities, the benefits, the risks, the governance, costs and operational impact.

From a branding and business standpoint this does seem like the right thing to do. It sets us apart from the pack - being a first mover has risks but also great rewards. It offers improved accessibility certainly from a client standpoint. We could have or, which would be more intuitive than the long URLs we have today.

It gives us some flexibility for the future, as we roll out mobile initiatives and products. We wouldn’t then have to go out and bid on other domains. And for security, if everything sits on your own brand domain, it’s more authentic and your clients can feel comfortable that it’s your real site.

We have spent a lot of time looking at the cost, but if you step back and look at what you spend in other areas of marketing, such as printed brochures or an advertising campaign, those costs can get high too.

There is the risk that perhaps this won’t become the hot new thing. But there is also the risk that if this does take off, you may have actually fallen behind your competition.

Dotbrand: What brands are doing so far

Canon - “Canon will make full use of the .canon domain name to increase the convenience and effectiveness of its online communications.”

Unicef - “As time goes on, a name such as www.donations.unicef or will become more intuitive in a more crowded internet space.”

London & Partners, on behalf of the city of London - “We believe that owning the .london domain name will not only generate increased opportunities for the promotion of the capital, but will achieve benefits for businesses and organisations across the city.”

Dotbrand explained

The .brand application period through Icann will run from 12 January to 12 April 2012. The list of applicants will be published in April 2012, with evaluations to proceed through to November, when the outcomes will be announced. The next chance to apply will be in 2015.

Alongside .brand domains, Icann is inviting organisations to register more generic terms, such as .hotel, .bank, .music, .london or .nyc. The registrars could then sell sub-domains onto smaller organisations. For example, independent stores could register their trading name under the relevant category.

If a category-led domain holder has specific criteria for its category, it must enforce that criteria equally, for example, stipulating that sub-domains of .bank will be awarded to banks only and sub-domains of .eco will be awarded to environmental organisations.

Icann will favour trademark holders for trademarked brand names but will award the registration of common word domains to open communities over brands. For example, HMV would be the likely winner of .hmv, but it would not be granted .music. Once registered, .music could then be the home of sub-domains for smaller businesses to register.

A brand with a common word name such as Apple could face a battle from an organisation such as an apple growers’ union. However, a brand could settle privately with the opposing organisation.

Brands can file an objection if they feel someone is infringing on their trademark. If two parties are applying for the same domain name, a panel of experts outside Icann will decide which is the rightful candidate. If no resolution can be achieved it will be awarded to the highest bidder at auction.

Sources: Icann and Melbourne IT

Readers' comments (5)

  • Another part of this same process and the only part that is a matter of necessity rather then a matter of choice are new gTLDs in non latin characters ( in Chinese,Japanese,Russian,Arabic)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Just another scheme by ICAAN to separate companies and people from their money.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • For most brands, trying to establish their .brand in the minds of consumers will be like trying to drain the ocean with a drinking straw.

    What most articles about the new top level domains (TLDs) fail to address or glibly gloss over is the fact that there are millions of existing and .com websites that have been, are being, and will continue to be advertised and marketed by their owners, be they large corporates, SMEs, non-profits, individuals or other entities.

    The owners of all these domain names have collectively spent hundreds of billions of pounds over the last 15 years burning into our collective consciousnesses that "a web address is something that ends in or .com".

    Talk about branding. "dot co dot uk" and "dot com" have brand recognition that a McDonalds or a Coca Cola marketing executive couldn't conceive of in their wildest dreams, let alone bring themselves to believe they could one day emulate! It's only because they're not "owned" by a single entity that these expressions don't head the "top UK brands" list year after year.

    And it's not just about online advertising - far from it. Every time a web address appears on TV, in a newspaper or magazine, on the side of a bus, on a billboard, on a tradeshow display, in a brochure or leaflet, on an invoice or letterhead, on a business card, as part of an email address, or in hundreds of other forms, it's serving to reinforce those 2 giga-brands: "" and ".com".

    This pent-up momentum in favour of the status quo will not be overturned by a .brand, no matter how large the company backing it. People often talk about winner-take-all scenarios in particular markets. Well, ".com" and "" have just about as close to 100% mindshare as it is possible to get.

    A string such as will simply not be recognised as a web address by the vast majority of people who see it, and it certainly will be less memorable than the current method of going to (the "instantly obvious" place to find information about McDonalds in the UK) then looking for the "Menu" link. At best, it will be considered a typo. At worst, it will make no impact of any kind.

    ICANN is pulling out all the stops to market the new TLD concept, and it's easy to see why. Here's an organisation that's collecting approximately US$8 a year from .com registrations, faced with the prospect of banking 23,000x as much as an up-front fee for a single new TLD, plus the equivalent of 25,000 .com fees in annual renewal costs (to use the figures from your own article).

    Marketing agencies and brand consultants love the idea as well, because they know it will be an excuse for their clients to spend billions on trying (and - whisper it now - failing) to rebrand their web addresses.

    However, it's time to face reality. Global .com alternatives such as .info and .biz have been around for a decade, yet have failed to gain significant recognition despite having a combined registration base in the millions. More recently, extensions such as .mobi have appeared with great fanfare and excitement, then effectively disappeared from view again, without eliciting as much as a shrug from the majority of consumers who have remained oblivious to their existence.

    And so it will come to pass for .brand extensions too. The questions any organisation considering a .brand strategy needs to ask itself are these: "Are we ready to flush millions of pounds away trying to hold back the tide, or will we heed the lessons of internet history and past TLD introductions and stand aside, and watch our competitors squander their resources? Do we continue to promote our existing web address, which we have pushed in every piece of marketing we have done over the last decade or more, or do we throw all that momentum on the bonfire that is .brand?"

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A small correction to the figures in my earlier comment: ICANN only receives approximately $0.25 per .com registration per year, meaning that the annual renewal fee levied by ICANN on each new gTLD ($25,000) is equivalent to their rake on 100,000 .com renewals.

    So it's no wonder they're bullish about the new gTLD launch! If they "sell" just 1,000 brands on the idea of getting their own .brand, they'll bring in as much from the renewals as they do from all 100,000,000 .coms out there!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • As Edwin says, this is just another way of making money for ICANN. Fair enough, I suppose but for the companies buying the TLD (and they are TLDs not gTLDS. How can a domain '.macdonalds' be generic?) it will just be for vanity.

    The article points out that using a .brand domain opens up a whole host of sub-domains. Is that an advantage? Really? Sub-domains are already available with the existing TLDs. What's stopping MacDonalds having now? It'll be a hell of a lot cheaper than £127.5k a year.

    Also, people aren't going to go straight to a sub-domain. Similar sections of different companies websites are called all sorts of things. People don't remember those individual names for the sections, they go to the main page and click links.

    The .brand domain may give a little bit of help with SERPs but I doubt it will do anything that a well optimised .com site can't do. Again, it'll also be cheaper too. Just because you're brand name is in the URL doesn't guarantee anything.

    The security aspect is the only advantage I'm not too sure about, as I don't know much about running a TLD. But, if it's on the web, it can be hacked.

    If Canon et al want to splash out on shiny new websites, it's their money. Just don't get let them convince you it's for anything more than vanity.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say


Related images

Job of the Week

Top Jobs


+media Facebook Twitter LinkedIn