Unstoppable Domains โ€” AI Assistant

.tv 18.tv sold for $5000

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

equity78

Top Member
:heavy_check_mark: TheDomains.com
:heavy_check_mark: TLDInvestors.com
Impact
32,411
DnJournal weekly sales

18.tv $5000
Stoixima.tv Bet in Greek $1596

Couple tv.com sold too

destinytv.com $2000

resorttv.com $2900
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
AfternicAfternic
A bit of a low sale for 18.tv, but good news overall. Especially TV.com names are still up there in the $x,xxx range even though they're dead here on Namepros. Maybe I should hold onto my GeoTV.com names rather than selling them for $99 each.
 
0
•••
DnJournal weekly sales

18.tv $5000
Stoixima.tv Bet in Greek $1596

Couple tv.com sold too

destinytv.com $2000

resorttv.com $2900

Very nice .tv sales:lala:
 
0
•••
Interesting, ResortTV.com is offering customized, web powered, TV channels to hotels / resorts very similar to what I'm doing with HotelTvStation.com.

htmlindex, from my experience... many, if not most, in the .TV forums "can't handle the truth" about tv.com.

Take this thread for example: http://www.namepros.com/dot-tv-appraisals-industry-news/718934-tv-officially-now-hotter-than-tv.html

Now imagine if somebody, like snoop, said there were more .net than .tv at the cable show and I proved him wrong... by a lot, how many 'way to go', 'good job' posts do you think there would be in that thread? How many are there? -0 ... so we're not dealing with objective, fair minded, folks. IMO.

Those of us who have, and love, .tv and tv.com names know listing a tv.com on the .tv forum is like bringing a black guy to a klan meeting. He ain't welcome in the club.:hehe:


A bit of a low sale for 18.tv, but good news overall. Especially TV.com names are still up there in the $x,xxx range even though they're dead here on Namepros. Maybe I should hold onto my GeoTV.com names rather than selling them for $99 each.
 
0
•••
...listing a tv.com on the .tv forum is like bringing a black guy to a klan meeting. He ain't welcome in the club.:hehe:

...aside from the blatant(and unnecessary, at least for a professional forum, "he he" being a buzzword, I guess)analogy pertaining to the subject of .tv and ...tv.com, I don't care which one you prefer.

I like .tv. You like ...tv.com, fine. Just keep it at a decent level, if you can...
 
0
•••
Clearly you do care, your response to the "Its official... TV rules!!!" post cited above was "...Excellent, Thanx, Dot Stop!!!"

Clearly its o'k, here in .tv land (south of the dot (lol), to (falsely) string tv.com up as being inferior to .tv -- and get cackles of approval from the .tv clan that gathers 'round.

But when someone proves otherwise; Silence.

Why would folks even celebrate the bashing of, or declare supremacy over, another extension? And if they got it wrong why would they not come back and say so? It woulda been the fair an decent thing to do.

When snoop unfairly attacked .tv we rightfully chastised him for it. But when some .tv folks unfairly attack tv.com... many here support that... or remain (peer pressure) silent.

Face it. The .tv forum segregates tv.com into a lesser than position... and the .tv clan appears fine with that.

Like what you will. But don't string-up, or cheer the lynching, of what you don't like.


...aside from the blatant(and unnecessary, at least for a professional forum, "he he" being a buzzword, I guess)analogy pertaining to the subject of .tv and ...tv.com, I don't care which one you prefer.

I like .tv. You like ...tv.com, fine. Just keep it at a decent level, if you can...
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Clearly you do care, your response to the "Its official... TV rules!!!" post cited above was "...Excellent, Thanx, Dot Stop!!!"...

...Face it. The .tv forum segregates tv.com into a lesser than position... and the .tv clan appears fine with that.

Like what you will. But don't string-up, or cheer the lynching, of what you don't like.

I like what I like, and that's .tv. You are the one with the inferiority complex. I said I do not care what you like and I really don't.

Why should that bother you? It gives you less competition to buy all the tv.com names you want. Should the sale of any or all of those reach mucho dinero, great...it doesn't change my likes one iota. So chill out and enjoy the ride.

You would also do well to cut the ignorant terminology like string-up or lynching as it REALLY exposes your insecurities. Just a suggestion...

I see 18.tv as being a great deal for the enduser.

The tv.com names mentioned that sold were great as well, but I like .tv and, if I may repeat myself, do not concern myself with any tv.com names before, now or in the future. I don't dislike them, I just don't care to own any, period.

Good luck with yours, though...
 
Last edited:
0
•••
You are the one with the inferiority complex.
Proving that its not "official" .TV did not, and does not, "rule" over tv.com actually rejects an attempt to cast tv.com with an. inferiority complex.

Its not about what you like or not caring for 'what I like'. That's childish. Its about caring about fairness.

Its about not making, and/or voicing support for false market claims that clearly are in your own economic self interest.

Now come on, Dot owns, and you promote, a site that sells .TV. Now, stating that you do not care for tv.com only underscores my point and speaks to issues of intent and motive.

Also, I have considerable investments in tv.com (as well as .tv) so excuse me if I don't "chill out and enjoy the ride" when false data is used to paint tv.com as less popular than it is.

Finally, "string-up" and "lynching" are not "ignorant terminology"... as "terminology" can't ignorant -only people can. I find it interesting those who strung-up folks also used the word 'ignorant' as a lynch pin.
 
0
•••
I'll keep my response pithy to avoid bloating the eye, so to speak.

Clearly you do care, your response to the "Its official... TV rules!!!" post cited above was "...Excellent, Thanx, Dot Stop!!!"
I think he states clearly that he doesn't care which one you prefer. Multiple times. Yet you still take him out of context.

Clearly its o'k, here in .tv land (south of the dot (lol), to (falsely) string tv.com up as being inferior to .tv -- and get cackles of approval from the .tv clan that gathers 'round.
Where is that done? I believe you mistake excitement for .TV as anti TV.COM.

To keep the annoying cultural reference: I have more White friends than Black friends - I guess I must be a racist.

But when someone proves otherwise; Silence.
Where's the proof and where is the lack of response?


Face it. The .tv forum segregates tv.com into a lesser than position... and the .tv clan appears fine with that.

No. .TV forum is a .TV sub-forum and a tv.com is not a .TV hence it's always the stranger in the subforum. The only people make a fuss here about TV.COM v .TV is you (and Snoopy once).

The quote said TV.COM was dead on Namepros. He was selling in :
"Domains For Sale - Fixed Price"

You correlated that to some .TV subforum anti tv.com b$. Not sure how.

Like what you will. But don't string-up, or cheer the lynching, of what you don't like.
He likes .TV.
He doesn't give a shit about TV.COM

Seems simple. Where's the beef?


FINALLY:

Your post leaves the mind hungry for substance.
The 'aftertaste', I get, is one that has everyone pitting .TV against TV.com. Yet I don't see any evidence of that.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
I love TV.com ... always have, always will.


For some names they actually sound better, for some they sound too long!
 
0
•••
I paid around $1500 for ForSaleTV.com a while back when I owned forsale.tv.

I still own the name and although I feel its still a great domain name, I would never buy another tv.com unless it was a bargain and I could see it being a quick flip.

I feel .tv stands alone now and is a much better investment and looks a lot better also.

Just my few cents worth.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
0
•••
0
•••
He / She can always try and make me an offer, however think i will pass on $x.xxx
 
0
•••
Domain Recover
DomainEasy โ€” Live Options
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the pageโ€™s height.
Back