Yeah... this is probably why account names should be in a different namespace than domain names. Or at least fixed-fee pure-ownership account names that can also be used by clients to access a server should have a far less desirable TLD by convention. And the other namespace designed to be used for more professional domain names should have the far more desirable TLD and should be based on a leasing model.
Also, I think we need to get rid of the idea of every account having a name. I don't think assigning a random sequence of letters and numbers as a name is a good solution. There should be a separation between the fee of creating a new account and the fee of adding on a name to the account. Many accounts (especially with stealth transfers) shouldn't need a name at all. Some may even be okay with holding off on adding a name to their main account and just using their unique ID instead. User clients can always use a local alias to map to the unique account ID (and in that case they don't have to be limited to the blockchain constraints on account names, e.g. using Unicode). This also means that the blockchain can charge a far more reasonable fee for non-premium account names than just the cost of creating an account (which should remain low).