"Brand names online can build trust and security." ???
>"Brand names online can build trust and security."
Say what? Most of the time now, corporations have already outsourced their online marketing presence to Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc etc. So people won't be going to .cocacola, they're already going to socialmediaofyourchoice/cocacola, and even that isn't a direct path, mostly due to so many people always googling the company, then going to one of the top links. We're starting to hit a point now where even the .com addresses have substantially less value then they once did just a few years ago. If it was 1997, then all these boutique names might make sense, but I personally don't see the point of adding much more than ".club" for non-prof clubs (and that one is a maybe after 20 years of people just going to .com first, and then .org), and then ".xxx" for well, you know, wink wink and a nudge.
Most average users have no clue whether that link is .com, .org, .co.uk, or .whatever. Worse than that, most average users don't care as they can't be hassled with security. This describes a large chunk of my own family unfortunately who are already ripe for security exploits as a result. Increasing numbers of boutique domains just exasperates the problem.