MillersCrossing
Account Closed
- Impact
- 29
and you HAD TO CHOOSE NOW, between owning a xxx.tv portfolio OR xxxtv.com portfolio - which would you choose?? - same exact names, just.com or .tv at the end of the domains.....
.tv If push came to shove...
- Thread starter MillersCrossing
- Start date
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
- Impact
- 62
.tv
i know al the .com is king stuff, but i fully believe that .tv is carving its own niche, and even tho you can say bliptv.com, i like the sound better of blip.tv.
to me, the tv.com sounds like an afterthought. like, a .com that tried to be....
but, i hold both, as i try and keep a diverse portfolio in the "tv/videocentric niche".
i know al the .com is king stuff, but i fully believe that .tv is carving its own niche, and even tho you can say bliptv.com, i like the sound better of blip.tv.
to me, the tv.com sounds like an afterthought. like, a .com that tried to be....
but, i hold both, as i try and keep a diverse portfolio in the "tv/videocentric niche".
- Impact
- 80
I think it depends on the name.
- Impact
- 120
Good question.
I prefer .tv as a niche but I also own keyword tv.com and etc. Hedge my bets.
For instance if debates.tv was open and its yearly fee I am perfectly happy with debatestv.com or printerstv.com. Besides those 2 are beginning gain some traffic.
For most part .tv even with higher registration expenses. Go .tv!
I prefer .tv as a niche but I also own keyword tv.com and etc. Hedge my bets.
For instance if debates.tv was open and its yearly fee I am perfectly happy with debatestv.com or printerstv.com. Besides those 2 are beginning gain some traffic.
For most part .tv even with higher registration expenses. Go .tv!
- Impact
- 0
i dunno, i always view xxxtv.com as the poor mans xxx.tv , but they seem to be selling high
I go with .tv, because I can afford to wait until the egg hatches
I go with .tv, because I can afford to wait until the egg hatches
- Impact
- 25
xxx.tv for sure!
- Impact
- 80
I have to say....are we talking about the domain xxx.tv, or are we talking about exampleexampleexample.tv?
That is my catch point.
That is my catch point.
- Impact
- 1,243
if push came to shove nether i would have gone for LLLL.com
but to late now i made my choice so ill stay the coarse.
xxxtv.com just says to me dot. tv does not work....but i have a alternative
am just being honest dont slate me.
but to late now i made my choice so ill stay the coarse.
xxxtv.com just says to me dot. tv does not work....but i have a alternative
am just being honest dont slate me.
Last edited:
- Impact
- 677
Out of the 2, I prefer xxx.tv but I also own quite a number of TV.com as well
- Impact
- 599
TV.com
TV.com
Why?
1. Because the BBC had this debate a long time ago - and take a look where BBC.tv takes you and where BBCTV.com takes you.
2. Because the place where .TV comes from may not actually exist as an entity within the next decade. (yet another ice shelf calamity is announced this morning and Tuvalu doesn't go above 15ft in elevation ANYWHERE within its territory)
3. Because how ever hard you try to push other extensions, the reality is that .com is king and will stay that way forever (too much money has already been invested).
4. Because, as internet TV takes hold, many of the individual companies involved (ie those putting up the $millions) in building a site and brand will market their niche channels as TV.com (take a look at things like Bob Geldof's KentTV.com as an example - $1.2 million spend). If it's good enough for Sir Bob its good enough for me. Kent.tv didn't even get a look in.
5. Because it is cheaper for the individual to get in the market.
6. Because in the last 12 months the number of fabulous TV.com's available has disappeared. Try doing geoTV.com's on anywhere above 200k inhabitants or finding wickedly interesting niche markets like BiofuelTV.com and see what I mean. (if you do find some and are still .tv minded - please let me know - I will buy them)
7. Because whenever I mention that I am buying TV.com's, all the ones I'd lined up to purchase seem to disappear. The 'quiet purchase' alone makes me realise other people REALLY know which way the wind is blowing - and they will only tell you AFTER the barn door has closed.
8. Because it is impossible to purchase a good TV.com name for less than 20 times the price that it was registered - and thats from domainers who are only interested in a quick buy and sell. Those who genuinely want the names for their own purposes (like every magazine and publication on the planet) wouldn't sell you their name if you offered them your life savings.
9. Because, when really forced into making a decision between .tv and TV.com - corporate executives will ALWAYS do their research properly - and will err on the side of TV.com (yes I know there are exceptions).
10. Because TV.com says this is a TV channel (or more likely converged website/TV channel/magazine) while .tv simple says "i couldn't get the .com so I bought this instead"
11. Because I say so.
Having said all that, the TV.com phase will itself only last until the 'converged' TV channels they eventually represent are successful enough to warrant purchase of the genericname.com
And the moral of the list. If you've got a .tv make sure you also get the TV.com as well. If you've already got the TV.com then buy the .tv If you haven't got enough to buy both - forget .tv IF the average person on their computer still types in XXXTV.com when told the name is a XXX.TV - after all that publicity, what chance is there of them changing now.
SORRY to the .TV brigade (and I am among your number) but the sooner you examine the failings of spending money on .tv over TV.com, the sooner you will have a chance of making money in your chosen profession / hobby.
I know this is not what this audience want to hear, but Miller's Crossing asked a valid question and deserves an objective opinion - not our normal, subjective, slanted, self-serving views.
TV.com
Why?
1. Because the BBC had this debate a long time ago - and take a look where BBC.tv takes you and where BBCTV.com takes you.
2. Because the place where .TV comes from may not actually exist as an entity within the next decade. (yet another ice shelf calamity is announced this morning and Tuvalu doesn't go above 15ft in elevation ANYWHERE within its territory)
3. Because how ever hard you try to push other extensions, the reality is that .com is king and will stay that way forever (too much money has already been invested).
4. Because, as internet TV takes hold, many of the individual companies involved (ie those putting up the $millions) in building a site and brand will market their niche channels as TV.com (take a look at things like Bob Geldof's KentTV.com as an example - $1.2 million spend). If it's good enough for Sir Bob its good enough for me. Kent.tv didn't even get a look in.
5. Because it is cheaper for the individual to get in the market.
6. Because in the last 12 months the number of fabulous TV.com's available has disappeared. Try doing geoTV.com's on anywhere above 200k inhabitants or finding wickedly interesting niche markets like BiofuelTV.com and see what I mean. (if you do find some and are still .tv minded - please let me know - I will buy them)
7. Because whenever I mention that I am buying TV.com's, all the ones I'd lined up to purchase seem to disappear. The 'quiet purchase' alone makes me realise other people REALLY know which way the wind is blowing - and they will only tell you AFTER the barn door has closed.
8. Because it is impossible to purchase a good TV.com name for less than 20 times the price that it was registered - and thats from domainers who are only interested in a quick buy and sell. Those who genuinely want the names for their own purposes (like every magazine and publication on the planet) wouldn't sell you their name if you offered them your life savings.
9. Because, when really forced into making a decision between .tv and TV.com - corporate executives will ALWAYS do their research properly - and will err on the side of TV.com (yes I know there are exceptions).
10. Because TV.com says this is a TV channel (or more likely converged website/TV channel/magazine) while .tv simple says "i couldn't get the .com so I bought this instead"
11. Because I say so.
Having said all that, the TV.com phase will itself only last until the 'converged' TV channels they eventually represent are successful enough to warrant purchase of the genericname.com
And the moral of the list. If you've got a .tv make sure you also get the TV.com as well. If you've already got the TV.com then buy the .tv If you haven't got enough to buy both - forget .tv IF the average person on their computer still types in XXXTV.com when told the name is a XXX.TV - after all that publicity, what chance is there of them changing now.
SORRY to the .TV brigade (and I am among your number) but the sooner you examine the failings of spending money on .tv over TV.com, the sooner you will have a chance of making money in your chosen profession / hobby.
I know this is not what this audience want to hear, but Miller's Crossing asked a valid question and deserves an objective opinion - not our normal, subjective, slanted, self-serving views.
jimbojimbo-
I appreciate your input, even though some of your logic appears convoluted. The tv.com appears strong but certain names will demand the .tv only because of the convergence that you mention.
.com will be king of its species but the techno-evolution of the internet will branch off and the application of .tv will be a comfortable fit for a (worldwide) public that grew up with the term TV(50 years plus).
Radio was and is still a king in its own realm and much money was and is invested in it and evolved but television came along and branched out and is evolving with the internet as well. My point is that even with the same attributes the adage that "perception is reality" means people will more than likely identify .tv with visual(tv.com piggybacks this) and be more comfortable typing in a term that they understand to be visual.
I do not dispute the power of .com but I do see the advantages of .tv in visual stimuli and so do many others as the extension appears to gain popularity day by day, especially in European and Asia cirlcles.
Last, when and if Tuvalu sinks into the province of Atlantis, .tv will remain, of that it appears an easy decision.
You do have a great post though and it would do members here well to read it as it contains many valid points. Thanks for your input and helping in making this forum informative, fun and exciting!
I appreciate your input, even though some of your logic appears convoluted. The tv.com appears strong but certain names will demand the .tv only because of the convergence that you mention.
.com will be king of its species but the techno-evolution of the internet will branch off and the application of .tv will be a comfortable fit for a (worldwide) public that grew up with the term TV(50 years plus).
Radio was and is still a king in its own realm and much money was and is invested in it and evolved but television came along and branched out and is evolving with the internet as well. My point is that even with the same attributes the adage that "perception is reality" means people will more than likely identify .tv with visual(tv.com piggybacks this) and be more comfortable typing in a term that they understand to be visual.
I do not dispute the power of .com but I do see the advantages of .tv in visual stimuli and so do many others as the extension appears to gain popularity day by day, especially in European and Asia cirlcles.
Last, when and if Tuvalu sinks into the province of Atlantis, .tv will remain, of that it appears an easy decision.
You do have a great post though and it would do members here well to read it as it contains many valid points. Thanks for your input and helping in making this forum informative, fun and exciting!
- Impact
- 62
Jimbojimbo said:TV.com
Why?
1. Because the BBC had this debate a long time ago - and take a look where BBC.tv takes you and where BBCTV.com takes you.
hmmm, yes a long time ago was just that, a long time agolook where emmys.com takes you.
2. Because the place where .TV comes from may not actually exist as an entity within the next decade. (yet another ice shelf calamity is announced this morning and Tuvalu doesn't go above 15ft in elevation ANYWHERE within its territory)
sink or swim, .tv will remain
3. Because how ever hard you try to push other extensions, the reality is that .com is king and will stay that way forever (too much money has already been invested).
no one here has ever disputed that
4. Because, as internet TV takes hold, many of the individual companies involved (ie those putting up the $millions) in building a site and brand will market their niche channels as TV.com (take a look at things like Bob Geldof's KentTV.com as an example - $1.2 million spend). If it's good enough for Sir Bob its good enough for me. Kent.tv didn't even get a look in.
if you spend some time in the threads here, you will see numerous companies utilizing .tv.if its good enough for mercedes benz, its good enough for me
5. Because it is cheaper for the individual to get in the market.
yeah, .com is cheaper- 9 bucks at godaddy- tv is 24 bucks at me.tv- most of us can deal with the few bucks difference
6. Because in the last 12 months the number of fabulous TV.com's available has disappeared. Try doing geoTV.com's on anywhere above 200k inhabitants or finding wickedly interesting niche markets like BiofuelTV.com and see what I mean. (if you do find some and are still .tv minded - please let me know - I will buy them)
so so true
7. Because whenever I mention that I am buying TV.com's, all the ones I'd lined up to purchase seem to disappear. The 'quiet purchase' alone makes me realise other people REALLY know which way the wind is blowing - and they will only tell you AFTER the barn door has closed.
i know how you feel- hard to grab them for sure
8. Because it is impossible to purchase a good TV.com name for less than 20 times the price that it was registered - and thats from domainers who are only interested in a quick buy and sell. Those who genuinely want the names for their own purposes (like every magazine and publication on the planet) wouldn't sell you their name if you offered them your life savings.
also true-
9. Because, when really forced into making a decision between .tv and TV.com - corporate executives will ALWAYS do their research properly - and will err on the side of TV.com (yes I know there are exceptions).
again, spend some time in this forum and read- lots of corporates are utlizing .tv- many of mtv's offspring sites are .tv. i am thrilled they did their homework
10. Because TV.com says this is a TV channel (or more likely converged website/TV channel/magazine) while .tv simple says "i couldn't get the .com so I bought this instead"
hmmmm, dont agree- but your opinion is surely welcome
11. Because I say so.
welcome to our sub-forum. next time bring cookies- and dont drink the punch. because I said so.
Having said all that, the TV.com phase will itself only last until the 'converged' TV channels they eventually represent are successful enough to warrant purchase of the genericname.com
And the moral of the list. If you've got a .tv make sure you also get the TV.com as well. If you've already got the TV.com then buy the .tv If you haven't got enough to buy both - forget .tv IF the average person on their computer still types in XXXTV.com when told the name is a XXX.TV - after all that publicity, what chance is there of them changing now.
SORRY to the .TV brigade (and I am among your number) but the sooner you examine the failings of spending money on .tv over TV.com, the sooner you will have a chance of making money in your chosen profession / hobby.
I know this is not what this audience want to hear, but Miller's Crossing asked a valid question and deserves an objective opinion - not our normal, subjective, slanted, self-serving views.
no need to apologize- you have good points- but like others who come in here and dont read thru what the meat of the forum is, you would have seen many of your points discussed in great lengths.
what you are wrong in saying is:
but the sooner you examine the failings of spending money on .tv over TV.com.
.tv has not failed me. not in the slightest.
again, welcome-
- Impact
- 80
Jimbojimbo said:
Here's your cool aid.
Here's your t-shirt.
Drink up and put the shirt on.
Similar threads
New posts ➔
-
1-Word premium .org or .com
- 26 posters
- rgdomainer
-
Flowpoly.com- Post by Aquzy
-
RecruitCloser.com, Websave.net
- Post by Aquzy
Polls of interest ➔
-
What are your strengths as an investor?- 188 voters
- 27 replies
-
What's your domain portfolio size?
- 472 voters
- 139 replies
-
How do you think a potential buyer first checks if your domain is for sale?- 530 voters
- 52 replies
Hot this week ➔
-
[SOLVED] Domain Resolution Mystery Turns Out To Be Domain Misspelling!- 40 replies
- 11 points
-
Stop chasing buyers — make them come to you.- 32 replies
- 3 points
-
Afternic Fast Transfer | Request Price Lander- 35 replies
- 3 points
-
.Vegas After 10 Weeks: What the Data Shows About This Geo-TLD- 17 replies
- 3 points
-
Is Sedo still worth it?
- 19 replies
- 7 posters
Hot this month ➔
-
The $99 Experiment Is Teaching Me More About Domain Liquidity Than Appraisal Tools Ever Did- 156 comments
- 63 points
-
Feedback on DM offers- 119 replies
- 17 posters
-
AI vs. SI- 50 replies
- 19 points
