.tv Comment On Hotel.TV

[DU]

Posted in another Thread. Deleted because it was off topic. But in order to make a complete asshat of myself I've decided to post it here in all its glory.

In five years I will come back and see how right I was. I've already been to the future which makes it easier to make these kind of laughable assertions.

I'd take hotel.tv in a heartbeat if I could afford it.

Aside from the obvious usage potential, the seo value would be phenomenal.

Generics are underrated, if you see the top sales in ANY extension, they're almost always generics.

You're entitled to your difference of opinion. You're certainly far more experienced than I; however, I've got the advantage of having visited the future.

There is a transition afoot. I think generics may have their place - but I just don't like them in the TV namespace and they will lesses in the whole global tld namespace soon enough.

I'm not sure the "obvious" potential. I have no idea what I would do with it other than look at it and think how jealous everyone else was.

I have been on vacations and booked them online - I never search by hotel. I search by destination... in fact my first stop is always kayak.com (to get a price baseline) and then the rough guide series (excellent guides too).

I think it has been proven by now that SEO value is in developed content and not purely name alone. The real value of a domain in the market space that is "hotel" is in repeat visitors and traffic. I don't know that "Hotel.TV" buys you that. It's memorable so it's not bad but I don't think it's ENGAGING which is my new mantra. So it's a decent domain but not a killer one that I'd pay for in a "heartbeat".

In real domaining terms 10K is peanuts but in pure domainer terms it's quite a large amount with uncertainty of returns. Like everything else - find an end user and make a great ROI. With regular renewal - it's probably an easy gamble. Some of the more connected guys here could no doubt flip it for $100,000,000... (I exagerrate, but reasonable ROI I'm sure exists for those guys/gals)

What always makes me laugh is statements like :

I'd take hotel.tv in a heartbeat if I could afford it.

If I was so sure of something that I would take it in a heartbeat I could afford it. End of discussion. It means nothing when people say "IF something I WOULD do something".

This isn't meant as a slight on you - it's a general observation of people. In fact, I'm sure I've probably said it before - probably yesterday. But if someone offers me $50 for a $10 I don't think I would ever say, "well I would but I am short right now", which is essentially what you're implying or I'm inferring.

In looking at an overall picture. Generics are high return. But in terms of overall cost to an end user - the acquisition of generics is far less than the development of a flagship domain. I tend to believe that the latter is the future - PARTICULARLY in the TV space.

I hope everyone who invests proves me wrong. I just don't see the OBVIOUS use of Hotel/Medicine. Resort I'm more agreeable to

Just speculating. Probably considered bullsh*tting but its more interesting to read this than "just regged poopee.tv" I'm hoping.

OR I REALLY WILL QUIT!

Full disclosure: I own BuildingSociety.TV... now THERE'S a generic but at the price?!? couldn't turn it down.... So I'm not ANTI-generics. I'm just not seeing them as the great ROI of the future.. especially in the TVs.

I really need to blog more and write here less. You can all begin the hatin' now that you think Snoop has convinced me to go to the dark side (which he hasn't.. I'm just bored with separation of domaining and intelligent marketing... I think the gap is closing RAPIDLY)
:hearts:

I hope the new owners make mucho dinero!
__________________

 

[ThreeD]

The overpriced and to many overrated .com is not as strong as it once was as the younger generation is not as discriminating when they see other extensions with bonafide websites while the .com has a parked page or poorly developed website.

I have to agree with you on this. .com is somewhat overpriced, but it's all a matter of supply and demand. Notice that most of the "big" .com sales are made between US owners/companies. That's because the people in the US primarily uses .com! Most people within the US aren't aware of other extensions, including .TV and .US.

In Europe or Asia that's a completely different story.

The good thing is that the younger generarion is picking up on things fast and they're more "open minded" (I don't want to step on any feet here) or let me say they're not so "locked in" on .com. Why? Because other TLD's may be better suited for what they're trying to achieve. The young generation is all about video and interactive media, thanks to new interactive possibilities and technological advances. Video blogs, media websites, interactive tv shows online, you name it. Why would they choose a secondary .com over a great, brandable .TV? They don't and that's why TLD's like .TV will pick up the pace fast. As previously stated in this thread, googleTV will also contribute to the merging of internet and television (time will show if that helps the .TV extension forward)

BUT, I have to say that I'm seeing the same "parking" tendencies in .TV land so unless things change for the better, .TV is just as bad as .COM in terms of a development / parking page ratio.

I personally HATE parked pages. I'd love to see every domain developed. For .TV to move forward it's important to promote the extension with media-rich content and quality websites. Parked pages won't do .TV any good, not now and not in the long run!

 

[Jason.tv]

this domain has more value and potential then you think, I am very surprised by all the comments I have seen.

Expedia Affiliate allows Hotel bookings from not only the US but all over the World,

Over 100k hotels: EAN has access to over 100k hotels globally, over half of which are individually negotiated by Expedia's in-house lodging team. Our scale and relationship with suppliers that have access to availability and rates that makes Expedia the market leader.

They have access to a deep hotel inventory and packaging technology that makes for a richer travel offering for the customers

this works by the xml intergration branded into your site though api, you can see a perfect example using this at travelnow ,

lets see some more negative comments..

Jason

 

[freedom30]

I have to agree with you on this. .com is somewhat overpriced, but it's all a matter of supply and demand. Notice that most of the "big" .com sales are made between US owners/companies. That's because the people in the US primarily uses .com! Most people within the US aren't aware of other extensions, including .TV and .US.

In Europe or Asia that's a completely different story.

The good thing is that the younger generarion is picking up on things fast and they're more "open minded" (I don't want to step on any feet here) or let me say they're not so "locked in" on .com. Why? Because other TLD's may be better suited for what they're trying to achieve. The young generation is all about video and interactive media, thanks to new interactive possibilities and technological advances. Video blogs, media websites, interactive tv shows online, you name it. Why would they choose a secondary .com over a great, brandable .TV? They don't and that's why TLD's like .TV will pick up the pace fast. As previously stated in this thread, googleTV will also contribute to the merging of internet and television (time will show if that helps the .TV extension forward)

BUT, I have to say that I'm seeing the same "parking" tendencies in .TV land so unless things change for the better, .TV is just as bad as .COM in terms of a development / parking page ratio.

I personally HATE parked pages. I'd love to see every domain developed. For .TV to move forward it's important to promote the extension with media-rich content and quality websites. Parked pages won't do .TV any good, not now and not in the long run!

...I concur with most of what you are expressing here, and don't forget that the web is no longer limited to the desktop, laptop and HDTV and game consoles. It has become rather mobile with the technology of today(iPhone, iPod, ipad and whatever awaits us in the near future), so it is imperative that .tv pick up the pace and develop itself and NOT rust in sedo's(or anyone else's) parking lot as .com seems content to do.

The future presents both challenges and benfits to the newer extensions as .com prices itself out of relevance. And .tv will pick up the slack that .com is providing.

 

[ThreeD]

What does any of this mean? people can do anything?

It means that ANY project involves taking risks, that goes for Hotel.TV as well. You can never guarantee 100% success for a project, but intelligence and information can help remove the factors that eventually may have led to the failure of a project.

If you still don't see the business model, a good example would be eyedomainous's post. I will say this one more time - you don't need a lot of money to start a successful project. How do you think Google and facebook started out? I'm pretty sure they didn't have millions to spend, but they're pretty popular now don't you think? Or what about Justin.TV?

Someone who is a creative thinker might pull something off? That could be said of any domain.

EXACTLY! That's why .TV and other TLD's are on the rise. People, especially the younger generation see the potential of other extensions (including .TV) and go for those instead of good old .com!

Here is a question: Instead of someone with the talents and money of Mark Zuckerberg owning it, how about if the average web developer owned it? Could he build sound decent with it? That is the acid test of a domain with good potential. Is there a clear model?..is it obviously doable?

I know it is possible and you'll see it happen more and more in the future. Even if a dev gets a project started single-handedly, it doesn't mean he can't team up with other companies over time to promote the domain/idea somehow. A lot of people snapped up a lot of great .TV domains earlier this year. I am pretty sure some of them will end up as great websites with a lot of media content. I'm not sure what Portalis has in mind with their buying spree, but I hope they have a plan for their domains.

 

[garptrader]

.COM domains often remain parked because .COM registrants have such insane price expectations. So as those using the internet become accustomed to seeing a .COM domain parking page, type-in traffic is on the decline. Type-in traffic is a one-time event which obtains perhaps 1-3%% of search volume for a keyword phrase. No long-tail search, no repeat visitors and no traffic for topic-related keywords. Development comes at a cost but the risk is typically much lower on a .Net or .TV because the acquisition price is more palatable. Time will tell how many of my .TV sites generate a meaningful ROI but I could never have even made the attempt in .COM.

 

[eyedomainous]

While it took a huge company with a lot of money to build the biggest Hotel TV network, (LogeNet spent nearly a billion to wire around 2 million hotel rooms with cable tv). An internet powered hotel tv network could serve the same number of rooms, with more content options, for tens-of-thousands. So "a lot of money" compared to what?

There are clear models. I'm doing it with one of them, and I don't have the talents or anywhere near the money of Mark Zuckerberg.

I'm simply asking where the obvious business model is here. The only answer seems to be you could do all sorts of "new innovative things" if you were a huge company and had a lot of money.

Here is a question: Instead of someone with the talents and money of Mark Zuckerberg owning it, how about if the average web developer owned it? Could he build sound decent with it? That is the acid test of a domain with good potential. Is there a clear model?..is it obviously doable?

 

[equity78]

Talent wise I don't think Zuckerberg has anything on you Claude. You are top notch IMO.

 

[freedom30]

Talent wise I don't think Zuckerberg has anything on you Claude. You are top notch IMO.

...my sentiments exactly!

 

[gr8trfoo]

.COM domains often remain parked because .COM registrants have such insane price expectations.

I dont know about that. My .com's remain parked mainly because parking still produces a steady passive income stream better than any other. I rarely get any inquiries on even the best names so my price expectations have no practical bearing at all.

.TV's hardly get any traffic at all so while parking a .tv is an option its usually a meaningless option. That might change in 10 years or thereabouts. Then again it might never change...

...point seems to be that you are still dwelling on and languishing in an extension that, while still stronger than the others, has grown weaker with the sheer amount of 21st technology that exists regarding cyberspace and people are purchasing and using the other extensions, .tv included.

I'm afraid that the 21st century tech you invoke doesnt stop at weakening .com. Domains period seem destined to become relics of a rapidly foregone era. Just when is anyone's guess.

 

[snoop]

Expedia Affiliate allows Hotel bookings from not only the US but all over the World,

Over 100k hotels: EAN has access to over 100k hotels globally, over half of which are individually negotiated by Expedia's in-house lodging team. Our scale and relationship with suppliers that have access to availability and rates that makes Expedia the market leader.

They have access to a deep hotel inventory and packaging technology that makes for a richer travel offering for the customers

this works by the xml intergration branded into your site though api, you can see a perfect example using this at travelnow ,

lets see some more negative comments..

Jason

All true, but how is that going to make is easier to set up a hotel site focused on video? In my view that type of thing is what would make it fairly easy to set up on c/n/o or a local country code.

---------- Post added at 11:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 PM ----------

If you still don't see the business model, a good example would be eyedomainous's post.

Didn't he just say the project wasn't going well? Personally I thought it was very low quality when I saw it (look for the thread where we argued about it at the time), just rehashed youtube content, and along way from being original.

I will say this one more time - you don't need a lot of money to start a successful project. How do you think Google and facebook started out? I'm pretty sure they didn't have millions to spend, but they're pretty popular now don't you think? Or what about Justin.TV?

Also Microsoft started with $100. So the logic is because of all that hotel.tv is likely to be successful if developed?

A lot of people snapped up a lot of great .TV domains earlier this year. I am pretty sure some of them will end up as great websites with a lot of media content. I'm not sure what Portalis has in mind with their buying spree, but I hope they have a plan for their domains.

You think we'll see "great websites" but hope some people have plans for their names. Ironic.

---------- Post added at 11:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 PM ----------

I dont know about that. My .com's remain parked mainly because parking still produces a steady passive income stream better than any other. I rarely get any inquiries on even the best names so my price expectations have no practical bearing at all.

.TV's hardly get any traffic at all so while parking a .tv is an option its usually a meaningless option. That might change in 10 years or thereabouts. Then again it might never change...

I think that sums it sums up the typein situation well.

It is ironic that people complain about high prices in .com whilst also predicting its downfall, the two do not go together. They'd be better off talking about how .com and PPC values have declined rather than trying to make an argument about high prices for the better quality terms being a bad thing.

I'm afraid that the 21st century tech you invoke doesnt stop at weakening .com. Domains period seem destined to become relics of a rapidly foregone era. Just when is anyone's guess.

I think this will happen, just not sure when, in the next 20-30 years is my guess. I think the importance of the domain has declined somewhat with apps, social networking etc I don't think that is going to kill it, but who knows what is around the bend.

 

[ThreeD]

Didn't he just say the project wasn't going well? Personally I thought it was very low quality when I saw it (look for the thread where we argued about it at the time), just rehashed youtube content, and along way from being original.

I don't know what thread you're referring to, but I was talking about his post in this thread. I agree with you that rehashed youtube content is not the way to go if you want to create a successful .TV site. Original content is where it's at, there is no way around it.

Also Microsoft started with $100. So the logic is because of all that hotel.tv is likely to be successful if developed?

I wonder how many times to I have to rephrase myself before you understand what I'm tryin to say. I wasn't saying anything about Microsoft was I? All I'm saying is that you CAN achieve success without a million dollar bankroll if the right precautions are taken! Success is never given, it's earned through hard work. It has been done before and it will happen again. Down the road it's just important to remember that no project is fail-proof, that goes for ANY project, including Hotel.TV.

The chance of failure can however be reduced through proper research and a well structured business plan.

You think we'll see "great websites" but hope some people have plans for their names. Ironic.

You need to go back and read what I said, snoop.

I know we'll see great .TV websites in the future, Portalis isn't the only company with great .TV names last time I checked. Portalis (as an example) bought a lot of great names during the premium sedo .TV auction, and I hope THEY put them to good use. As of right now most of them don't resolve or they're forwarded to their 50% functional moebel website, which is a shame.

I do know some people that are working on exciting .TV projects. They will help bring .TV into the right direction.

 

[freedom30]

I don't know what thread you're referring to, but I was talking about his post in this thread. I agree with you that rehashed youtube content is not the way to go if you want to create a successful .TV site. Original content is where it's at, there is no way around it.



I wonder how many times to I have to rephrase myself before you understand what I'm tryin to say. I wasn't saying anything about Microsoft was I? All I'm saying is that you CAN achieve success without a million dollar bankroll if the right precautions are taken! Success is never given, it's earned through hard work. It has been done before and it will happen again. Down the road it's just important to remember that no project is fail-proof, that goes for ANY project, including Hotel.TV.

The chance of failure can however be reduced through proper research and a well structured business plan.



You need to go back and read what I said, snoop.

I know we'll see great .TV websites in the future, Portalis isn't the only company with great .TV names last time I checked. Portalis (as an example) bought a lot of great names during the premium sedo .TV auction, and I hope THEY put them to good use. As of right now most of them don't resolve or they're forwarded to their 50% functional moebel website, which is a shame.

I do know some people that are working on exciting .TV projects. They will help bring .TV into the right direction.

ThreeD
...your admirable but futile efforts of attempting to communicate with the 20th century mindset is akin to a three dimensional object trying to explain itself to a two dimensional one...there is a serious disconnect as Mr 2D(you know who)has no grasp or concept of the extra dimension...nice try but misdirected energy that can be put to better use.

 

[equity78]

I don't think domains will go away, you need an address. There are plenty of people around the world who make part time or full time income with their websites and blogs. More people are getting on the net and want their own place. Apps will continue to grow for the mobile web sure but a lot of people at least in the Western world access the net at work on a laptop or desktop. Domains will still be needed, social media is an ancillary component but no one would be foolish enough to rely on someone else for their livelihood.

I think that using You Tube content with a human filter can certainly be a use. The bottom line is if you make the experience better and make money most people are not Tesla or Edison and will never invent something totally unique and that's not their job. This elitist atitude online about oh the site does not look great or its not good enough is funny considering most of the people critiquing would not measure up in the real world in areas such as looks, charisma or athletic ability. Everyone needs to find their niche and just so long as its legal and customers like the site who cares what someone else thinks? Perfect example I was at a meeting and someone busted on a company website, they said I don't like your logo and the CEO said I don't like your face, just seeing you makes me want to throw up. It was hysterical. Focus on why you are doing what you are doing. And I agree with you Snoop either .com is overpriced or its losing luster, not both. Every alt ext owner should root for .com because if its going down the tube then alt ext is already flushed. Again IMO

 

[freedom30]

...either .com is overpriced or its losing luster, not both.

I feel that it indeed can be both.

The by now artificially high prices that .com owners insist upon lead to its diminishing stature and the abundance of extensions that are available at a fraction of the cost for the same name boosts the useage of those by people more familiar with variety as time goes by and takes its toll on the Goliath of extensions.

Not one David but many are in play here in the 21st century and a more mobile cyberspace as you explain only assures that more people will opt for value and reasonable prices for what they need for names to the left of the dot.

While I certainly wish .com no harm(I have quite a few myself), let's just say that it's about time that endusers can find viable alternatives to it...

 

[eyedomainous]

Ray, freedom30... Thanks! Deeply appreciated... and the respect is mutual.

ThreeD... the Hotel Tv concept I expressed in this thread is not the same as my hotel channel, at FieldGuideTV.com, which was the focus of the other thread snoop referred to.

snoop... I don't know where you got the idea that things are not "going well" with my hotel channel. Business is steady. Viewership is up. The fact that LogeNet launched their own web-powered in-room tv channel is actually a good thing... as it vindicates my concept and now there is a new 'competitive market'. My "knockdown blow" comment is about them copying my concept/channel instead of buying it.

ThreeD & snoop... Original video content is a form of visual art. As it was with paintings, when tools to make art became cheap and readily available the art market became flooded. This lead to the opening of the art gallery, where selected works are put on public display.

If someone told you that galleries have no value because its "just rehashed content", or they don't create 'original content',... well, what would you think of that??

YouTube gets 24 hours of video uploaded every minute... because the canvas is Free and the 'tool' is globally available, so the need for curators to create (thematic, viewer friendly) galleries is even more important.

Finally, consider that every work of art, or video, on display in a gallery Is Original to the person that made it. Simply displaying it, on a gallery wall or on a website, does not render the work unoriginal.

Also, at the moment, I'm streaming 77 videos at my L.A. hotel channel (gallery) site. If you think viewers would rather visit 77 websites because each site produced original video..., or even make 77 clicks on a single website, I think you might want to revisit the value of the viewer experience.

 

[snoop]

I wonder how many times to I have to rephrase myself before you understand what I'm tryin to say. I wasn't saying anything about Microsoft was I? All I'm saying is that you CAN achieve success without a million dollar bankroll if the right precautions are taken! Success is never given, it's earned through hard work. It has been done before and it will happen again.

That doesn't mean hotel.tv has a straightforward business model that can be done on a budget. Still wondering what your argument is in relation to this name. It justs seem to be "...facebook was a massive success therefore hotel.tv....." "Google....therefore Hotel.tv...."

There is no substance to an argument like that.

I know we'll see great .TV websites in the future, Portalis isn't the only company with great .TV names last time I checked. Portalis (as an example) bought a lot of great names during the premium sedo .TV auction, and I hope THEY put them to good use. As of right now most of them don't resolve or they're forwarded to their 50% functional moebel website, which is a shame.

I do know some people that are working on exciting .TV projects. They will help bring .TV into the right direction.

When people buy multiple names at auctions that isn't someone who is going to build hugely successful sites. I think you are looking in the wrong direction if you are looking for massive successes,if it ever comes it won't be from domainers, it won't come from companies buying a dozen names at auction, it comes from people who want to build a great site, not from people who want to acquire domains.

Just look at how much .tv domainers have talked about development in the past (remember all the geo's for a start), after years of discussion there is nothing to show for it, all we've got is rehashed youtube content, sites of very minimal popularity and a lot of dropped domains.

---------- Post added at 02:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:44 PM ----------

snoop... I don't know where you got the idea that things are not "going well" with my hotel channel. Business is steady. Viewership is up. The fact that LogeNet launched their own web-powered in-room tv channel is actually a good thing... as it vindicates my concept and now there is a new 'competitive market'. My "knockdown blow" comment is about them copying my concept/channel instead of buying it.

This is what you said,

"While it was a knock-down blow... I'm not 'out'. I'm still in the game and I have plan-of-attack for the next round.", that doesn't sound like something doing well to me."

Secondly it wasn't "your concept", it was just video streamed from the web, that isn't novel, they haven't "copied you".

ThreeD & snoop
If someone told you that galleries have no value because its "just rehashed content", or they don't create 'original content',... well, what would you think of that??

YouTube gets 24 hours of video uploaded every minute... because the canvas is Free and the 'tool' is globally available, so the need for curators to create (thematic, viewer friendly) galleries is even more important.

Finally, consider that every work of art, or video, on display in a gallery Is Original to the person that made it. Simply displaying it, on a gallery wall or on a website, does not render the work unoriginal.

Also, at the moment, I'm streaming 77 videos at my L.A. hotel channel (gallery) site. If you think viewers would rather visit 77 websites because each site produced original video..., or even make 77 clicks on a single website, I think you might want to revisit the value of the viewer experience.

The point is there is nothing novel or original about it, it is just streamed youtube content, you like to think it is original then wonder why someone supposedly "copies you" rather than buying you out.

Truly novel, unique concepts get patented and that is when they get bought out. You can't just do something completely obvious, sign up one customer than hope to get bought out.

The only reason it would get bought out is,

-If it had a solid customer base that was worth buying

or

-The technology was truly original and had been patented.

 

[freedom30]

...-The technology was truly original and had been patented.

...in the people of the 21st century vs Don Quixote...I rest my case!

 

[eyedomainous]

snoop... by your own standard, what you say has no value as every word is "rehashed content". If things like context, selection and presentation add nothing to content why not remain silent until you can post wholly "original content"?

 

[samual]

Hi dear friend,
In looking at an overall picture. Generics are high return. But in terms of overall cost to an end user - the acquisition of generics is far less than the development of a flagship domain.

 

[gr8trfoo]

Also, at the moment, I'm streaming 77 videos at my L.A. hotel channel (gallery) site. If you think viewers would rather visit 77 websites because each site produced original video..., or even make 77 clicks on a single website, I think you might want to revisit the value of the viewer experience.

i'm not finding the 77 videos.