Headline Feeds
Does anybody remember the DotComGuy? How about IUMA? Or even the e-Cavemen?
Last year, the Net was inundated with publicity stunts and name games aimed at driving Net-weary consumers online.
Have a new Web site to publicize? Sponsor a baby-naming contest, like IUMA.com did, paying new parents a few thousand bucks to name their new son or daughter after a dot-com.
Tired of working 9 to 5? Lock yourself in your house for a year, living solely off the Internet and watch the corporate sponsorships roll in -- or not -- in the fashion of DotComGuy.
It seemed like there would be no end to the creativity and scope of the e-commerce publicity stunts. But take a look throughout the dot-com landscape today and the only stunts you will find are companies managing to survive online with making a profit.
Goodbye To All That
What happened? Were these stunts victims of the overall economic downturn? Or were they inherently flawed? Both, say analysts.
"Public enthusiasm for the more gimmicky aspect of the Internet has gone way down for obvious reasons," IDC analyst Malcolm Maclachlan told the E-Commerce Times. "A lot of people have lost a lot of money. We're past the point where just attaching the word Internet to something makes it cool."
In addition, most of the dot-com stunts were performed by pure plays, which are now virtually extinct, said Yankee Group analyst Paul Ritter.
"The era of the dot-com stunt is over and it should be over," Ritter told the E-Commerce Times. "There is a correlation in peoples' minds that dot-com stunts are associated with dot-com failures. Pure play e-tailers particularly are a dying breed."
Too Much, Too Early
Moreover, dot-com stunts were based on what is now considered the taboo of e-commerce: brand advertising overkill.
"The stunts were merely a reflection of the attempts to gain brand exposure, and not about brand building," said Ritter.
Maclachlan believes that the decline of dot-com stunts is also related to an important lesson for Internet retailers that took some time to become clear.
"[The Internet] has shown itself to be more gimmick-proof than one-way mediums like TV or radio," Maclachlan said. "People searching the Net have greater consumer choice, and something without style or substance consumers are less likely to bother with and it's less likely to work now."
Hindsight Helps
But did dot-com publicity stunts work in the first place?
"With 20/20 hindsight, I don't think they worked," Ritter said. "As someone who covers
the online retail 
industry for a living, I don't know what the benefits of the DotComGuy
were for any particular company. Even the Pets.com
puppet didn't work."
Even if they did serve a purpose a year and a half ago, the stunts would serve no real purpose now, said Maclachlan.
"Did they work in beginning? Absolutely," Maclachlan said. "Any little stunt was probably worthwhile. But they can't work today because there's less people trying to launch companies now, and it's impossible to get financing."
Try, Try Again?
Of course, that does not mean companies still might not try a stunt or two in the future.
"In many cases it's not too expensive to try and do these kinds of stunts, which is why in some cases they were done in the first place," Ritter said. "They probably will be tried again, but I don't think with any significant or lasting impact."
As for those who still harbor dreams of becoming the next household Internet name, Maclachlan had the following advice:
"Calling yourself DotComGuy is probably a good way to get beat up on the
street these days."
Talkback: 
