When ICANN opened the first application round for new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) in 2012, more than 600 companies took a leap of faith and applied for their own Brand TLD. The idea of controlling a digital extension such as .google, .barclays, or .bmw was intriguing, but the practical benefits were not yet well understood. For some, it became a branding experiment; for others, a security measure; and for a few, a long-term commitment to reshape their online presence.
Now, with ICANN preparing to open a new application window in 2026, Brand TLDs are no longer theoretical. More than a decade of real-world experience provides valuable lessons on how companies have used — and sometimes failed to use — their TLDs strategically.
In 2012, most Brand TLDs launched with enthusiasm but little planning. Canon was one of the first to receive a Brand TLD, but never rolled it out widely. Others, like Google, applied for multiple TLDs but used only a few in practice.
Yet some companies integrated their TLDs deeply into their business models. Barclays and BNP Paribas shifted their consumer-facing sites to .barclays and .bnpparibas respectively, explicitly positioning their namespaces as safer alternatives to .com or .co.uk. Customers were told: if it ends in .barclays, it’s authentic.
For AXA, the motivation was consistency. The insurer operates in more than 50 countries under different domain variations. By migrating to .axa, the company consolidated its online identity under a single, globally trusted namespace.
These examples illustrate a key point: a Brand TLD is not valuable in itself. Its impact depends on the strategic vision behind it.
Perhaps the most successful use case for Brand TLDs has been in building consumer trust.
The banking sector provides the clearest example. Phishing attacks and fraudulent lookalike domains cost the financial industry billions every year. By moving to .barclays and .bnpparibas, these banks created closed namespaces where only the brand could operate domains. Customers could type an address with confidence, knowing there was no possibility of an impostor .com or .net site mimicking their brand.
This shift didn’t eliminate all risks, but it raised the bar for fraudsters. Instead of monitoring thousands of fake domains registered across open TLDs, the banks could educate customers that .barclays meant authenticity.
For industries where trust and data integrity are mission-critical — banking, healthcare, government — Brand TLDs provide a structural advantage that goes beyond defensive domain registrations.
Not every Brand TLD was about security. Some companies saw theirs as a marketing playground.
BMW has used its TLD to launch product-specific and regional campaigns, such as i3.bmw for electric vehicles or usa.bmw for localized content. The short, memorable domains provided flexibility that .com or .de addresses could not.
Similarly, Google experimented with .google to support product launches and campaigns. Though it has not rolled out .google universally, its selective use demonstrates the potential of a trusted namespace for time-sensitive marketing initiatives.
The lesson: Brand TLDs are not only defensive tools. They can enable creative, agile marketing aligned with evolving brand priorities.
Another under-appreciated and, of course, less visible application has been internal systems.
Many companies now use their Brand TLD for employee portals, partner logins, or internal testing. A namespace like intranet.brand or partners.brand not only strengthens security but also simplifies IT administration.
This internal use rarely attracts headlines but is one of the most practical long-term benefits of owning a TLD: companies can carve out secure, private namespaces that they fully control, independent of third-party registries.
The mixed record of the 2012 round offers important guidance for 2026:
• Vision matters. Companies that treated their Brand TLD as a strategic asset — not a novelty — continue to use it successfully today;
• Integration is essential. A TLD must be woven into digital, marketing, and security strategies, not left on the sidelines;
• Compliance is just the beginning. Meeting ICANN’s contractual requirements is necessary but not sufficient; long-term value comes from business alignment;
• Inaction is costly. Companies that did not apply in 2012 have spent the last decade maintaining expensive defensive domain portfolios across hundreds of open gTLDs.
The upcoming round introduces a more structured framework. Brand TLDs are formally recognized in the Applicant Guidebook, with defined criteria under Specification 13. This clarity reduces uncertainty, but it also raises expectations: applicants must provide detailed corporate disclosures, financial projections, and ongoing compliance certifications.
At the same time, the strategic context has shifted. Digital trust, cybersecurity, and online brand protection are now board-level concerns. Consumer expectations around authenticity and safety online are far higher than they were in 2012.
In short: the case for Brand TLDs is stronger, the rules are clearer, and the stakes are higher.
For companies considering a Brand TLD, the challenge is no longer whether ICANN will recognize their application — it is how to design a namespace strategy that delivers lasting value.
That requires expertise across multiple dimensions:
• Legal: Ensuring compliance with Specification 13 and ICANN contracts;
• Strategic: Building a business case for trust, security, or marketing innovation;
• Operational: Planning registry operations, governance, and integration with IT systems.
At Pitch, we bring all three perspectives. Having supported close to 100 dotBrand applications in 2012 – the first Brand TLDs – we have seen what works, what fails, and what evolves.
Our SaaS platform now streamlines the complex application process, while our lawyers and domain experts ensure compliance and strategic alignment.
Brand TLDs are no longer an experiment. They are proven instruments for companies that want to secure their digital identity, build consumer trust, and innovate with confidence.
The lesson from the past decade is simple: the value of a Brand TLD depends on the vision applied to it. Those who see it as infrastructure, marketing tool, and security layer rolled into one have found sustainable benefits. Those who applied without a plan often let theirs lapse.
As 2026 approaches, the opportunity is clearer than ever. The question for companies is not whether a Brand TLD can work — but whether they are prepared to use it strategically.
At Pitch, we’ve been guiding this journey since the first round. If you’d like to explore whether a Brand TLD aligns with your future, our team is here to help.
%402x.svg){kind=icon}
%402x.svg){kind=small}
%402x.svg){kind=icon}
