.tv DNJournal and .tv sales

[michaeldotcom]

Like many domainers, I like reading regularly DNJournal. It's always particularly interesting to read their weekly domain sales reports as they help us to follow the market.

However, I've always wondered why so few big .tv sales are reported on DNJournal. It seems that DNJournal always misses quite a lot of them and barely mentions them at the very bottom of the page.

So I've tried to gather some facts about it and studied .tv sales from March and April 2008.

Here is the list of big .tv sales reported on DNJournal in March and April 2008 :

April 29th
viajar.tv $12,856
welcome.tv $10,000
outnow.tv $1,250

April 23rd
guildford.tv $1,300
liquor.tv $1,250
ud.tv $1,000

April 15th
hôtel.tv $1,726
lula.tv $1,500
liquor.tv $1,250
milk.tv $1,000

April 8th
ntv.tv $5,680
yosemite.tv $1,200

April 1st
none

March 25th
none

March 18th
fussball.tv $28,367
ni.tv $1,800

March 11th
gals.tv $1,530

March 4th
anybody.tv $5,500
efamily.tv $2,300

As DNJournal reports only sales over $1,000, I've tried to look for .tv sales over $1,000 in March and April 2008.

Here are the missing sales reported on NP in March and April 2008 :
luxembourg.tv $3,130
plymouth.tv $1,000
fiets.tv $1,500
eastlondon.tv $5,000
paramedic.tv $1,750
currentevents.tv $1,500
surrey.tv $1,008
hampshire.tv $1,008

Here is the missing sale I found on TDNAM in March and April 2008 :
avisos.tv $1,155

Here are the missing sales I found on Sedo in March and April 2008 :
visiteurope.tv $1,500
weplay.tv $5,000
economia.tv $1,091
report.tv $1,725
it.tv $12,500
pi.tv $2,738
shoponline.tv $1,100
nc.tv $2,034
kiev.tv $1,950
sportfishing.tv $1,550
flirting.tv $1,000
berkshire.tv $1,008
banger.tv $1,206

I probably missed quite a lot of them myself, as I only looked on 3 venues (NP, TDNAM and Sedo) and didn't mention any private sale.

But the facts are that DNJournal only reported 17 .tv sales over $1,000 in March and April 2008, while I easily found 39 of them on NP, TDNAM and Sedo alone.

So my question is why is DNJournal missing so many big .tv sales and listing just a few at the very bottom of the page ?

If we look at the facts, it's obvious that .tv sales are rapidly increasing in number and in value, but that DNJournal isn't reporting that properly.

 

[equity78]

Ron reports everything that is reported to him, TDNAM sales are not reported and private sales need to show proof of the sale.

Sales done on NP are private sales, so unless someone contacts Ron and provides proof it is not on the weekly sales.

 

[michaeldotcom]

Ron reports everything that is reported to him, TDNAM sales are not reported and private sales need to show proof of the sale.

But what about Sedo sales ? There have been quite a lot of big .tv sales on Sedo lately, they were reported on Namebio and DNSalePrice, but not on DNJournal.

So I would have two questions :
1) Why aren't most of those .tv sales on Sedo reported on DNJournal ?
2) Should domainers on NP report their big sales more often to DNJournal to ensure that it shows better how well .tv is doing now ?

 

[jeffoverman]

i agree in what your saying some but i also think alot of people dont want to report there sales and be under the radar....

 

[michaeldotcom]

i agree in what your saying some but i also think alot of people dont want to report there sales and be under the radar....

I know and understand that some people want their sales to remain private. I definitely have no problem with that, and I actually mentioned in my first post that I wasn't talking about any private sale.

What I'm talking about is domain sales that are NOT kept private and that are actually reported everywhere else (NP, Namebio, DNSalePrice, etc.), but not on DNJournal.

 

[equity78]

If they were on SEDO, they have not reported it to RON yet, like Sportfishing.tv was on this weeks report.

I have spoken to him about this before because sometimes they get on the list two for more than one week. I emailed him 3 in row that the same name was on more than one week.

If it sells anywhere but SEDO or Afternic then someone has to call him and let him know.

Jeff is right some want to not be seen. Roy sold Paramedic.tv and told everyone here. But I do not know if he told Ron he sold the name.

Michael if it is not on SEDO or Afternic or Moniker then for Ron it is a private sale.

 

[RPK]

luxembourg.tv $3,130

this was my fault, because the paypal didn't say what the money was for I would have needed to send in more information and screen shots and I just didn't have the time I can still send it in I guess.

 

[advaita]

Excellent list Michael - rep added - I particularly like visiteurope.tv - 'cause I've got VisitIndia.tv maybe I'll try and get Sedo to include it in one of their auctions

 

[ipodxpert]

Good Point Michael.In my case I had reported the sales of Yosemite.tv to Ron by sending him an email about it and telling him that it was sold on Sedo.com.He replied back saying that he will include the name in the list after he gets the confirmation from Sedo.

So if you have sold the name privately and you still want to report the sale then you have to show the proof of sale.But if you have sold the name either through Sedo or Afternic then Ron gets the report from them and provided you too report it to Ron.

It's a different story that most of the .tv sales are reported at the bottom of the page.

 

[michaeldotcom]

I think it would be really very useful if NP domainers could try and send him details about all their big .tv sales in the future.

I know it's not always easy as we're all very busy, but it could really help the .tv extension in the long run, as it would show the rest of the domaining community that the market is not only about .com, but that .tv sales are increasing rapidly both in number and in value, while more and more great .tv sites are developed.

When you read the DNJournal weekly sales report, you have 60%-70% of the page which is covered with .com sales in big colourful tables. And then you have just one or two .tv sales which are barely mentioned in a little sentence at the very bottom of the page. You would definitely miss them if you don't pay extra attention.

This always seems strange especially as many of the .com sales reported in DNJournal are barely $2,000-3,000 while the .tv sales are of a similar or even higher value.

These sales reports in DNJournal are very interesting but they would definitely benefit from looking more balanced and unbiased.

 

[jeffoverman]

would be great to think this and all the big sales get reported but i just feel its not all going be reported.( I meant the domainers reporting things)

time will tell..i used to care what other domainers think of .tv but i dont really care and .com will always be number one...

sales are tough here....but with registration growth year by year, sales reported last year seemed decent as i read this(forgot what they were) i am sure we are headed in the right direction.

i am not all that worried about ron reporting .tv sales...sales are happening each day in .tv...again some people just dont want others to know or who sold what weather it be private sales or sedo.. sure it would be nice to have the .com investors and people like frank, rick endorse .tv but things are happening without them.

there are a couple players that have said they like .tv extension.

hold the course follks..i am in this long term and as long as .tv continues to show upward charts i am happy.time will tell and more people will take notice.....

and over time the sales will be reported as well

 

[equity78]

It would be the very small minority that feel that Ron is not unbiased. He reports what he gets and the cctld list is third on the list that's all. If .tv makes the big chart it is reported like it was a couple weeks ago. There is no discrimination at DN Journal and saying otherwise on another forum would create a flame war the likes of which no one has ever seen on a domain forum. Ron is the most respected voice in this industry by a mile and I believe he is not discriminating against any extension whether it be .tv or another extension.

 

[jeffoverman]

i dont follow the reports what ron comes out with each week or daily..

i have taken notice on a couple nice big sales

J

 

[michaeldotcom]

It would be the very small minority that feel that Ron is not unbiased.

Excuse me, but that's definitely not what I meant. I've never said that Ron is biased. I don't know him at a personal level, and I have no reason to think that he has any kind of bias at all.

I was simply saying that the fact that few big .tv sales are reported to him (and then by him in DNJournal) and that they're placed at the very bottom of the page, may give readers a wrong impression.

The impression that there's no aftermarket for .tv domains, that this is just a little ccTLD with no future that nobody can actually resell at a good price. Things that I've read several times on NP and elsewhere and that are far from being true when we consider the hard facts.

As I said in my first post, I do really like and respect DNJournal. I was merely trying to express how I feel in a constructive manner, hoping that DNJournal could be even better than it already is.

 

[Ron Jackson]

Equity is correct. We think sales reports are only useful if they are based on real verified sales, otherwise the data is useless. Virtually every major sales venue sends their lists of completed sales to us every week (we ask them NOT to include sales on their lists until the domains have been paid for AND transferred to their new owners). If their customer asks them to keep a sale private, which happens often, they will remove it from the list they send us.

A lot of people confuse high bids in an auction with a completed sale. They are not the same thing due to the high number of deadbeat bidders. Someone posting a note in a forum that they made a sale is also not proof they actually did so. Anyone can post anything they want. If a sale is not completed on one of the major sales venues, it is a private transaction and the buyer or seller would have to report the sale to us and most importantly, provide documentation proving the price paid.

As equity also mentioned, the final section of our report is the country code section. .tv is a country code so that is the section .tv sales are reported in - unless they are high enough to make the all extension leader board at the top. Non .com global extensions are in the middle section. It is as simple as that - sorry no conspiracy.

I have no bias against any extension. My only bias is that the information we get be completely factual and verified. I would much rather leave out questionable data than put stuff in that has not been thoroughly verified. .tv is enjoying accelerating adoption and good names in that extension have a great future in my opinion. If you have been involved in a legitimate .tv sale, can prove it and want it reported, then by all means contact me with the information.

 

[jeffoverman]

wow!

Thanks Ron in coming here and explaining your thoughts and views in .tv

its an honor in reading your post...

i knew you were on here but was not sure......

cheers

j

 

[ipodxpert]

Thanks Ron for coming in and expressing your views.

 

[michaeldotcom]

Ron, thank you so much for coming to the forum to reply to the questions I asked. I really feel honoured that you did so.

As I said before, I really like and respect DNJournal very much and never implied that it was biased in any way. I simply wanted to understand fully the reasons why there are fewer big .tv sales on DNJournal than on NP, Namebio, etc.

Thanks for your very clear and detailed answer. I understand very well the fact that some reported sales may actually not really go through for a variety of reasons. I also understand that some genuine sales haven't been properly reported to you.

I simply hope that more genuine .tv sales will be properly reported to DNJournal in the future, so that it could be even better at reporting accurately real sales and help us follow the market.

Thanks again for your nice reply and for all your very interesting articles.

 

[smashfactory]

michael- i did not report current events to ron yet! i have just been busy as sin will get it to him this weekend to make the tuesday spread

 

[Jeff]

Private transactions ...

A lot of people confuse high bids in an auction with a completed sale. They are not the same thing due to the high number of deadbeat bidders. Someone posting a note in a forum that they made a sale is also not proof they actually did so. Anyone can post anything they want. If a sale is not completed on one of the major sales venues, it is a private transaction and the buyer or seller would have to report the sale to us and most importantly, provide documentation proving the price paid.

Thanks for the insight, Duke ... I think this (in bold ^ above) is good to keep in mind - as we peruse the threads - with respect to all posts of all sales, .TV or otherwise IMHO. :gl:

All the best,
-Jeff