.tv BIG MONEY MUGS - Who's ACTUALLY spending $10,000 a year on renewals?

[GoneWalkabout]

I've always been intrigued by WHO is really buying the $10,000 per year Premium names so I thought I'd do some research.

I picked a particular sector of the 'market' where there was an exact number of names (LL.tv) and discovered the following...

There are only 676 LL.tv names

Of these, some 140 (20.7%) are priced at $10,000 premium renewal every year.

Of those 140, only a mere 7 are actually taken. YES JUST SEVEN!

Of those 7...

One linked to a non-videcentric .com site

Two had a 'holding page' talking about the exciting things to come (yeah)...

Two had the 'girl with the backpack' ads

AND just TWO had a real 'watchable' TV channel sat on it

In simple terms, only 1 in every 20 (or 5%) of these extremely high-priced premiums are being SWEPT up by the world of domainers, developers and end-users.

Are the 5% buyers the gullible sector - or the smartie pants?

Does the fact that only one in every 70 of these names have any form of developed TV channel on it mean that the dream of internet TV is a lot further away than we think it is!

Or, does it mean that the premiums are WAY to high.

I would love to hear your views as I am literally reeling in shock!

 

[HeyNow]

I've always been intrigued by WHO is really buying the $10,000 per year Premium names so I thought I'd do some research.

I picked a particular sector of the 'market' where there was an exact number of names (LL.tv) and discovered the following...

There are only 676 LL.tv names

Of these, some 140 (20.7%) are priced at $10,000 premium renewal every year.

Of those 140, only a mere 7 are actually taken. YES JUST SEVEN!

Of those 7...

One linked to a non-videcentric .com site

Two had a 'holding page' talking about the exciting things to come (yeah)...

Two had the 'girl with the backpack' ads

AND just TWO had a real 'watchable' TV channel sat on it

In simple terms, only 1 in every 20 (or 5%) of these extremely high-priced premiums are being SWEPT up by the world of domainers, developers and end-users.

Are the 5% buyers the gullible sector - or the smartie pants?

Does the fact that only one in every 70 of these names have any form of developed TV channel on it mean that the dream of internet TV is a lot further away than we think it is!

Or, does it mean that the premiums are WAY to high.

I would love to hear your views as I am literally reeling in shock!

You won't see much branding by major corps in .tv. After all, it's the country code for Tuvalu, and blueblood first-world companies don't want to brand in a third-world TLD. Yes, I know there are several exceptions like NBC, but you're not to find GM branding in .tv. You will find GM branding in .mobi.

 

[StoneRoses]

You won't see much branding by major corps in .tv. After all, it's the country code for Tuvalu, and blueblood first-world companies don't want to brand in a third-world TLD. Yes, I know there are several exceptions like NBC, but you're not to find GM branding in .tv. You will find GM branding in .mobi.

Absoloute bollocks!, have you actually bothered to research anything about .tv before you decided to come into the .tv forum spouting your nonsense

There are plenty of companies who use .TV ,like Audi,Mercedes and many more if you care to read the threads,

I am sick of people like you coming in here talking bollocks when you clearly know **** all about it.

 

[cityforums.com]

Are the premiums too high ?

I think the more important questions are WHY some premiums are very high

on domains that are almost worthless in the .com ?

The premiums on some of the drops went up sky high ... again why ?

How can an extension get popular if it is discouraging takers ?

How can it justify this in the face of tons of news extensions coming soon in

to the market ?

I would suggest you all read the T&C about what they can and can not do

about pricing at renewal times. Some lawyers would tell you immediately to

STAY AWAY because you can not predict what they will do with prices and if

their present actions are any indication you can EXPECT BIG increases in the

future. If you can expect increases this presents a SERIOUS business risk.

 

[.tv]

Absoloute bollocks!, have you actually bothered to research anything about .tv before you decided to come into the .tv forum spouting your nonsense

There are plenty of companies who use .TV ,like Audi,Mercedes and many more if you care to read the threads,

I am sick of people like you coming in here talking bollocks when you clearly know **** all about it.

Hi Bob,
He knows very much about .TV

You won't see much branding by major corps in .tv. After all, it's the country code for Tuvalu, and blueblood first-world companies don't want to brand in a third-world TLD. Yes, I know there are several exceptions like NBC, but you're not to find GM branding in .tv. You will find GM branding in .mobi.

HeyNow,
Welcome to the .TV forum!

I suggest you to visit http://www.gmeurope.tv

 

[mckennaronnie]

Absoloute bollocks!, have you actually bothered to research anything about .tv before you decided to come into the .tv forum spouting your nonsense

There are plenty of companies who use .TV ,like Audi,Mercedes and many more if you care to read the threads,

I am sick of people like you coming in here talking bollocks when you clearly know **** all about it.

Your 100% right Bob, over & over we get people pop their head into .tv world and make sweeping statements with no facts & little research. :zzz:
Name any sector & i'll find you a big company that owns & advertises their .tv site.
Try this thread for .tv sites worldwide: Link Here

 

[cityforums.com]

Your 100% right Bob, over & over we get people pop their head into .tv world and make sweeping statements with no facts & little research. :zzz:
Name any sector & i'll find you a big company that owns & advertises their .tv site.
Try this thread for .tv sites worldwide: Link Here

Notice he spoke of mobi ... enough said.

 

[GoneWalkabout]

Let's not get sidetracked by a mobi publicist. We all know Tv is SET for GO, butcan we return to the questions posed by the 'REAL' research...

Are the 5% buyers the gullible sector - or the smartie pants?

Does the fact that only one in every 70 of these names have any form of developed TV channel on it mean that the dream of internet TV is a lot further away than we think it is!

Does it mean that the premiums are WAY to high.

 

[cityforums.com]

Let's not get sidetracked by a mobi publicist. We all know Tv is SET for GO, butcan we return to the questions posed by the 'REAL' research...

Are the 5% buyers the gullible sector - or the smartie pants?

Does the fact that only one in every 70 of these names have any form of developed TV channel on it mean that the dream of internet TV is a lot further away than we think it is!

Does it mean that the premiums are WAY to high.

Do you think the top domainers are stupid to not take .TV too seriously ?

Internet TV is and will continue to happen ... it doesn't have to be on .TV ...

using high premiums and stating they are necessary to get only serious

developers is a lie and it doesn't work ... if .TV continues to stumble ... .COM

will only get stronger and we shall see even higher prices there.

The 70% discount gave .TV a nice boost. In my opinion to protect the brand

from incoming erosion and ensuring a sunnier future they should repeat this.

 

[GoneWalkabout]

if .TV continues to stumble ... .COM

will only get stronger and we shall see even higher prices there.

Do you mean TV.COM will get stronger or just plain .COM

How is .TV stumbling?

 

[cityforums.com]

Do you mean TV.COM will get stronger or just plain .COM

How is .TV stumbling?

They need to protect the brand against possible erosion from the new TLDs.

Jacking up premiums is not going to help get more adopters.

If say a .tube or .vid gets approved and the pricing is stable

and transparent like .com ... I say they could be in trouble. The time to act

is now because .TV is still not commonly used and gets little type in traffic

for most domains. Type in traffic is a good metric to use in gaging the

strenght of an extension.

 

[CarryOn]

Jimbo, its an interesting question. Although I’m not so sure its fair to just look at 10k LL.TV names. If you look at premium ll.tvs priced below 2k, for example, you might get more useful information – but you’ll also get more domainers willing to take a punt.

I do think there is a premium price cut-off point beyond which only certain individuals/organizations will consider – this also applies to expensive .com names (hey, just look at the cowboys.com fiasco last fall).

Unless there is an immediately executable plan – most organizations do not want to pay large renewal fees OR pay up for an expensive .com generic. Your question really can be taken to a wider domain level not just .tv premium renewals.

So my feeling as to your specific question is that LL.TVs at 10k is a price deterrent.

.TVs adoption by large corporations is already a fact – the trend has accelerated over the past year. These high price premiums will get slowly picked off as time goes by and as a specific user requires the specific name. Some will also re-enter the pool as expected plans change or budgets get slashed. We also need to keep in mind that there is a world of difference between the value of UK.tv or US.tv and PL.tv or some of the other 10k priced ll.tvs.

Now as for developed premium names - there are far too many examples of lower priced premiums in use by major players.

But off the top of my head I do have an example of a medium size player using a 10k/premium name – those guys at Ten Alps Plc using:

www.public.tv (10k/yr) (video content from across the public sector – covering health, transport, environment, etc)

Ten Alps has also produced some great TV channels on lower priced premium names:

www.Vets.tv (Sponsored by the British Veterinary Association)
www.Teachers.tv (public/private partnership sponsored by the Dept of Education and Skills)

 

[james0306]

I don't think any extension like .tube or .vid will be a problem for .tv
Few reasons support my statement:

1. TV is a global recognized word, which exists more than 30+ years, and .tv itself also has a 8 year history.
2. You will need billions of dollars to promote a name like .tube worldwide, in order to make big companies to take it seriously. So far, I only see Google or Microsoft has the ability to do it. However, I don't see any motivation for them to do so yet.

IMO, in the area of Internet TV, we only need to concern about .com, tv.com, and .tv :gl:

They need to protect the brand against possible erosion from the new TLDs.

Jacking up premiums is not going to help get more adopters.

If say a .tube or .vid gets approved and the pricing is stable

and transparent like .com ... I say they could be in trouble. The time to act

is now because .TV is still not commonly used and gets little type in traffic

for most domains. Type in traffic is a good metric to use in gaging the

strenght of an extension.

 

[cityforums.com]

I don't think any extension like .tube or .vid will be a problem for .tv
Few reasons support my statement:

1. TV is a global recognized word, which exists more than 30+ years, and .tv itself also has a 8 year history.
2. You will need billions of dollars to promote a name like .tube worldwide, in order to make big companies to take it seriously. So far, I only see Google or Microsoft has the ability to do it. However, I don't see any motivation for them to do so yet.

IMO, in the area of Internet TV, we only need to concern about .com, tv.com, and .tv :gl:

If Demand Media does things right the tables will be turned and .com will

have nothing to fear but .TV

 

[heroes]

This thread seems to have gone way off track (or have I missed something).

Jimbo was questioning who would pay $10k for a premium LL.tv

 

[GoneWalkabout]

This thread seems to have gone way off track (or have I missed something).

Jimbo was questioning who would pay $10k for a premium LL.tv

Thanks Heroes - I was hoping someone would 'pull this back'.

It's a very serious question.

I don't have many 'high' premiums, but the ones I do have are considerable in size and will need a lot of yearly feeding.

Then I remembered the old story about looking around a card table and trying to work out who the 'patsy' was. If you couldn't see him - then YOU were the patsy.

I just wondered who the other players were- and wasquite shocked to find out there weren't that many out there in that particular sector.

I amd still in favour of premiums, but would like to now work out whether I am in favour of them being quite so high - or whether at about $5000 they become too restrictive - even to bigger players.

 

[cityforums.com]

Thanks Heroes - I was hoping someone would 'pull this back'.

It's a very serious question.

I don't have many 'high' premiums, but the ones I do have are considerable in size and will need a lot of yearly feeding.

Then I remembered the old story about looking around a card table and trying to work out who the 'patsy' was. If you couldn't see him - then YOU were the patsy.

I just wondered who the other players were- and wasquite shocked to find out there weren't that many out there in that particular sector.

I amd still in favour of premiums, but would like to now work out whether I am in favour of them being quite so high - or whether at about $5000 they become too restrictive - even to bigger players.

Just my opinion ... $5000.00 a month is nothing for a big player.

It needs to provide value for them to take the jump ... and also if .com

is doing the job why bother with Tuvalu is at work.

 

[hullswingerscom]

heynow... maybe your new to tv

plenty of companies use .TV

to many to list....have a look on google site:.tv

 

[Makis.TV]

As a reseller there is no way i ll pay $10.000 for an LL.TV without getting the type in traffic to get me some money back.
As a developer also there is no way to pay that kind of money, i d probably search for another .tv domain and save the money for marketing.
As a big player in TV i wouldnt care for $10.000 as long it fits my plans.

 

[jeffoverman]

jimbo,

the thing that amazes me is your insight into .tv, taking hours out of each day to do long posts, research and your probably the top 3 posters in .tv forum. thanks so much in sharing your insight and research..

now onto the question....i feel this..a corporation with deep pockets would not be afraid to drop 10k a year...its about video over the wild web, the name and branding....10k is way to rich for me a year to maintain one name...i think most domainers will say this...there are only maybe 5 people on .tv forum that can do this and make that work with a development project...

the only name i would love to own is bj.tv and very brandable name..1 in 4 searches are porn related, porn got the web going like mad and it will always be there...early in the internet days, that was the number 1 driving force, and guess what it is today...

so unless you have 2 or 5 people invested in a name together or a partnership that could work...speaking on behalf of a normal .tv domainer...even cowboys.com has big names behind this and they all own a fraction of the name...now with me, i would probably have to seek out 10 people to own a 10k a year fee name, since i am in the kiddy pool.. then development takes time, forming a business model, testing things, experiment things, drawing traffic, seo it all takes time...so lets say your first 3 years you will have to have some patience, thats just an estimate and its high end to get your course and map going in the future...thats 30k...

this reminds me of orlando thread some, i believe it was that thread where renewals and branding, one word names and if its worth the money..

disclaimer-i dont own any enom rental fee names as of yet however i am eying on 5 geo names and be my first purchase on the enom list..

good question and research...

ps...

agree with others and what bob says... these clueless people come into discussions and are clueless in .tv...reminds me of someone who is on the board here everyday and his name begins with an S.