.tv Has the .tv market peaked?

[snoop]

I think we are seeing numerous signs to suggest the .tv may have peaked. From what I can see of it, it is fairly common for relaunched/new tlds prices peak to at the time of the major auction, when speculator interest is at its highest, and you have a whole lot of people in the market who wouldn’t normally dabble in it. I’m not sure .tv will be an exception to this rule.

The only thing to change is there is now a large number of names in the market with genuine, real value, much like other extensions. In other words it is now on a level playfield in that respect but it is still only that, "level", not tilted upwards. The exuberance has carried over into a lot of unrealistic viewpoints recently in my view,

eg

-People claim this market is just starting to warm up and will be much stronger in a year. (we’ve heard that before)
-The idea that many of these premiums will be developed (of course that will never happen and is setting the scene for later disappointment).
-People talking about “trying to keep the momentum going” and trying to organize group auctions (as though this is an engine that constantly needs top ups of fuel to prevent breakdown).
-People talking about future .tv millionaires.
-World economies seeing another shock spreading out from Europe.


If you look back a month ago that really was a market with a lot of positive elements rolled into, many factors combining that may never be repeated.

So I put this question out there, do you think the .tv market has peaked?

 

[gr8trfoo]

...

 

[mjnels]

oh we know snoop around here very well. in fact some of us call him "snoop n scoop" due to his insistent .tv warnings. no one sane would do this so often so long unless there was a really good reason.

hmm ok.. really thats what you took away from my post?

 

[snoop]

In what way do you think .com would be more superior than .TV in the future?

Probably the obvious in that it far more popular, 100 times the popularity at a rough guess.

It is a bit like asking how the ipod will be better than the zune in the future. For those who are really thinking about questions like the above, what can I say?, fresh air needed? I mean that seriously.

Take a walk down the street, pretty much any street and you'll get the answer. Read what's on the the cars, read what's on the signs. Step away from the .tv forum for a moment.

Why are you so interested in .TV?

The record is now more than broken, the needle has worn trough to the other side.

 

[deb]

In what way do you think .com would be more superior than .TV in the future?

.COM is King but i love .TV

.COM is the establishment TLD

.TV Will become the establishment multimedia extension within 10-20years (its not there yet eg youtube.com)

 

[DU]

.COM is King but i love .TV

.COM is the establishment TLD

.TV Will become the establishment multimedia extension within 10-20years (its not there yet eg youtube.com)

In 10-20 years we'll have our thoughts directly sent to us by nano-waves distributed by a Chinese conglomerate. Our media choices will be controlled by an on board embedded chip with preference settings set by our parents (or children if we're too old to "get it").

 

[snoop]

Disagree. It will be an American company and it will be a .US...Just kidding : ) Watched Independence Day yesterday

Trust me, the .us people are saying much the same thing and had been for years. Just look at .co.uk and .de, then apply that success to the American market How could .us not do well? Well...nobody of any significance uses it. At least .tv has its niche though - known to some degree.

It seems to me in every alt tld there is a reasonable number of people who think that extension will become the standard (even to the extent of some people thinking it of .co as discussed previously in this thread). The chorus gets louder after big news/changes. If you go back 6 years it was .info/.biz. Maybe those registries need to mix things up a bit aswell.

 

[DU]

It seems to me in every alt tld there is a reasonable number of people who think that extension will become the standard (even to the extent of some people thinking it of .co as discussed previously in this thread). The chorus gets louder after big news/changes. If you go back 6 years it was .info/.biz. Maybe those registries need to mix things up a bit aswell.

Some people can't afford Bentleys so they drive Camrys. Then along comes a Hybrid... and then the VW clean diesel. All things go in cycles... nothing new there. Fads come fads go... some stick around. Who would have thought that the HIDEOUS Toyota hybrid would make it? Ugly and overrated? Go figure.

But I'm not sure what your point is. I think most people aren't claiming that .TV will take the .com market. Some might be, of course, but enthusiasm is good for the soul.

Right now .TV is (let's say for argument) 2% the value of .com with obvious limits.

What are the obvious limits: it is easier to find someone willing to pay $500 than $50,000 so as you get down to the lower numbers there are some opportunities. I believe you can sell average domains for $500 but not $500,000 so the 2% hits a base floor around $500 in my estimation.

Hopefully that's clear - its an easy concept I'm having a hard time clearly conveying.


So "XXX.TV" - It's not what you would make on "XXX.com" but then that .com has been held forever or cost a fortune in the aftermarket. The opportunity is there at the lower end of the spectrum for XXX.TV - it was available!

I think the spectrum is bigger than people actually willing to admit. There are domains in the XXX,XXX and the XX,XXX.

This is NOT X,XXX,XXX but then when was the last time someone here sold one of those?

Furthermore.

The one thing that people need to realize is that you can make a very successful site on a very memorable domain for under $2000 at the moment. If the web is your SECONDARY source of advertising this can be very nice investment.

If I hand out my business card at a trade show with Cakes.TV... it's much more brand friendly than MySillyCakeShop.com. Especially if I can personalize it.

For a LOT of people this is reality.

If you're looking to the web as your primary source of income then it takes a LOT of SEO work - and that point any web address that doesn't look stupid is as good as any other. Your only goal is to have the user not think "well that's not a real domain, probably a parked one".

I think the issue is that everyone is still thinking home-run - or. Mr Snoop, you think that's what they are thinking. Maybe that day will happen but it's WILDLY speculative. Saying a $20 reg today will magically and regularly become worth $30,000 is probably not a bet I would take. To say it WILL/DOES/HAS happened is a bet I would take.

To say that .TV will improve in investment value and .com will decrease in investor value for anything EXCEPT the top 1% of names is a bet I would take any day of the week.

I won't speculate on the future because the future has already started and I don't think domainers are going to like it one bit :hearts:

But the reality is there. You can make excellent ROI on .TV and I think it will continue for a while. The ROI on .com will continue to decrease.

 

[snoop]

Domain names, not including registrars (sort of), is a small business. You could do millions and still be a "fry flipper."

Agree, but note what the disccusion was actually about, which is the claim that .tv will be the main video extension, it is nonsense, just like some .us people think .us will overtake .com, and some .co people think that will overtake .com.

.tv has its niche, it has a market, but it is an alt tld for the video market. It is 14 years old and another couple of decades isn't going to change much. Make money from what it is rather than hoping for big changes in usage.

---------- Post added at 09:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:13 PM ----------

Some people can't afford Bentleys so they drive Camrys.

It is a bad analogy because .com starts from $8, even less than .tv.

It is a bit like telling people to collect seashells rather than paintings because some paintings are worth millions, well most paintings aren't worth millions, most are cheap.

What are the obvious limits: it is easier to find someone willing to pay $500 than $50,000 so as you get down to the lower numbers there are some opportunities. I believe you can sell average domains for $500 but not $500,000 so the 2% hits a base floor around $500 in my estimation.

Very few .com's are worth $500k, the average name is probably worth less than reg fee. People will generally buy a 3 word .com before an alt extension.

So "XXX.TV" - It's not what you would make on "XXX.com" but then that .com has been held forever or cost a fortune in the aftermarket. The opportunity is there at the lower end of the spectrum for XXX.TV - it was available!

The are two completely different names. To take your car anology (let's ban analogies soon folks ) it is like saying "I can't afford a red Ferrari so I'll buy a red Toyata", they are both similar but one is alot cheaper. A million dollar name is not in the same market as a 5 figure name. Buyers don't choose between xxx.com and xxx.tv.

The one thing that people need to realize is that you can make a very successful site on a very memorable domain for under $2000 at the moment. If the web is your SECONDARY source of advertising this can be very nice investment.

A sucessful site can be built on anything, the name is often not that important.

If I hand out my business card at a trade show with Cakes.TV... it's much more brand friendly than MySillyCakeShop.com. Especially if I can personalize it.

Aah the bad comparisons come out. Those are not two names of similar value. That isn't the choice people have.

To say that .TV will improve in investment value and .com will decrease in investor value for anything EXCEPT the top 1% of names is a bet I would take any day of the week.

Guess what....you've already taken that bet. People who took the other side of that bad would be very glad for it I think even despite the recent domain market slump. Most people who took that .tv bet would be wishing they hadn't.

I won't speculate on the future because the future has already started and I don't think domainers are going to like it one bit :hearts:

You're already speculating.

 

[DU]

It is a bad analogy because .com starts from $8, even less than .tv.

Find me a .com that you think is good.
Find me the same .TV that cost more.

Very few .com's are worth $500k, the average name is probably worth less than reg fee. People will generally buy a 3 word .com before an alt extension.

Most 3 word .com are valueless driven by the belief that Google will put you position one page one because "domain=search terms".

It's a myth perpetuated by domainers to sell to other domainers.

Not sure what you're driving it. People will buy a 3 word .com before and alt extension. Who's "people"? What 3 words? Who cares?

The are two completely different names. To take your car anology...
it is like saying "I can't afford a red Ferrari so I'll buy a red Toyata"

I don't really want you to because it was not really intended to show anything more than people have opinions, people have different investment points. It wasn't meant to be deep. But the truth is that the last time I went to buy a car I really wanted a Porsche. I looked at one but decided it wasn't worth the premium over what I ended up with which I love JUST as much...but maybe even more.

Buyers don't choose between xxx.com and xxx.tv.

I understand this - they've likely already ruled out the xxx.com. My point was that people that have an end user perspective will often be comparing xxx.us, xxx.tv to xxxyyyzzzaaabbb.com.

A sucessful site can be built on anything, the name is often not that important.

Difference between what is technically a true statement and marketing reality. It's a bullshit statement.

Aah the bad comparisons come out. Those are not two names of similar value. That isn't the choice people have.

It IS similar to the choice that people have. They're not of similar value? Ok. I apologize for using an example of non-similar value.

What keywords.com for cakes WOULD be similarly valued to cakes.TV?

Guess what....you've already taken that bet. People who took the other side of that bad would be very glad for it I think even despite the recent domain market slump. Most people who took that .tv bet would be wishing they hadn't.

Why would others be very glad for it? I don't understand. What did I do?

You're already speculating.

Not as much as others. But you're right. I am pwned here. My speculation on the future is actually true though. I've see it. I've heard it. I was there. I came back.

By the way: you did a fantastic job of ignoring most of the points I was trying to make and focusing on my silly comparisons, which frankly, I didn't spend a whole lot of time thinking about because they were not the salient points.

Bottom line.

.TV investment has potential growth. .Com has potential growth.

This discussion is pointless.
And I'm so stupid (or tired) as to only just now realize this.

I'm an idiot.:bingo:

 

[gr8trfoo]

Aah the bad comparisons come out. Those are not two names of similar value. That isn't the choice people have.

not exactly, but in comparative values they may not be far off.

cakes.tv = ????
cakes.com = ??????
mygreatcakeshop.com = ??

if i only wanted a name for my small bakery then mygreatcakeshop.com (which is available) may be perfect.

what are the choices people have, that is the question. what choices they have and what ones they will have and will make.

 

[snoop]

Find me a .com that you think is good.
Find me the same .TV that cost more.

That fact is for someone just registering a name .com is very affordable. There is no pint having a long winded discussion over the meaning of "good". I think I know what you are thinking (that ext isn't that important) and I disagree.

Most 3 word .com are valueless driven by the belief that Google will put you position one page one because "domain=search terms".

It's a myth perpetuated by domainers to sell to other domainers.

Lots of people think different things are "myths", make decisions based on the reality of the market not what you'd like it to be. If you think the market is wrong...guess what...the most likely scenario is that you are wrong

Not sure what you're driving it. People will buy a 3 word .com before and alt extension. Who's "people"? What 3 words? Who cares?

It is simply a statistical fact, more people buy long .com than shorter alt extensions.

But the truth is that the last time I went to buy a car I really wanted a Porsche. I looked at one but decided it wasn't worth the premium over what I ended up with which I love JUST as much...but maybe even more.

You can see the flawed logic here. You really wanted a Porsche, you couldn't afford it. Now you've convinced yourself the cheaper car is even better. I'm sorry but that is fooling yourself. I can't afford a Porsche either. That doesn't mean my 2001 Toyota is better, it is just more affordable. It is a cheap car.

I understand this - they've likely already ruled out the xxx.com. My point was that people that have an end user perspective will often be comparing xxx.us, xxx.tv to xxxyyyzzzaaabbb.com.

They won't be choosing between xxx.tv and a 4 word .com for reg fee, not realistic.

What keywords.com for cakes WOULD be similarly valued to cakes.TV?

Probably a two word .com with cake in it that has a reasonable degree of fit. Cakecenter.com, Fastcakes.com etc.

Why would others be very glad for it? I don't understand.

Because the .tv market has underperformed over many years.

By the way: you did a fantastic job of ignoring most of the points I was trying to make and focusing on my silly comparisons, which frankly, I didn't spend a whole lot of time thinking about because they were the salient points.

That is a funny argument, perhaps in that case don't make silly comparisons?

.TV investment has potential growth. .Com has potential growth.

Only one post ago you said you'd bet on 99% of .com's falling value.

 

[gr8trfoo]

Agree, but note what the disccusion was actually about, which is the claim that .tv will be the main video extension, it is nonsense, just like some .us people think .us will overtake .com, and some .co people think that will overtake .com.

oh. i thought it was whether the .tv market had peaked or not. hmmph.

well, in any case, i saw you mentioned something about most video sites being branded on a .com, which is probably correct. but i think you're missing the more essential point: what is it that people most immediately think of when they see a .tv?? if your use (i'm not forgetting that domainers dont actually have uses for names - i'm just getting down to the real engine for growth, the users), if the use is for a video centric site of any kind then .tv might be the very best choice - even if its the identical second level, even if the price were the same.

take for instance a city name, lets say des moines. if i want to invest resources into a interactive video site and market that in the local area then why would i even consider the .com? not even respecting the great likelyhood that the .com would cost 6 figures while the .tv may only be a few hundred. even if they were both 6 figures the .tv would make more sense. its something fresh but instantly recognizable. while the .com may instantly say "internet" i dont think thats so novel anymore, not so compelling on the face of it. its desmoines.com - "so what" vs. desmoines.tv, "lets see whats on".

yes snoop, television is a niche. a 64 billion dollar world wide vanity niche. just my 2 cents.

good night and good luck.

 

[snoop]

oh. i thought it was whether the .tv market had peaked or not. hmmph.

The quote I replied to today was from Deb who believes .tv will become the main extension for video.

what is it that people most immediately think of when they see a .tv?? if your use (i'm not forgetting that domainers dont actually have uses for names - i'm just getting down to the real engine for growth, the users), if the use is for a video centric site of any kind then .tv might be the very best choice - even if its the identical second level, even if the price were the same.

If it is the best choice why after 14 years are most video sites on .com?

take for instance a city name, lets say des moines. if i want to invest resources into a interactive video site and market that in the local area then why would i even consider the .com? not even respecting the great likelyhood that the .com would cost 6 figures while the .tv may only be a few hundred. even if they were both 6 figures the .tv would make more sense. its something fresh but instantly recognizable. while the .com may instantly say "internet" i dont think thats so novel anymore, not so compelling on the face of it. its desmoines.com - "so what" vs. desmoines.tv, "lets see whats on".

if I want to invest in an interactive video site and market it to locals
if the .com is too expensive
if the .tv were one thousanth of the price
if I thought the .com wasn't really that good
if I really liked .tv

yes in that situation the person would go with a .tv.

I can tell you who that person is....a .tv speculator!

yes snoop, television is a niche. a 64 billion dollar world wide vanity niche. just my 2 cents.

good night and good luck.

Finster, the niche for .tv in my view is websites for tv networks and tv shows. That is where most of the market is. The secondary usage is video conetnet sites but .tv is an alt extension for this. Yes, I think this is a niche extension.

 

[DU]

That fact is for someone just registering a name .com is very affordable. There is no pint having a long winded discussion over the meaning of "good". I think I know what you are thinking (that ext isn't that important) and I disagree.

Not what I am thinking. You said .com was cheaper than .tv.
True only for regfee items - this is not exactly a worthwhile discussion given that there are no worthwhile one word (barely 2 word) regfee .coms (unless you slap a 3d/The on the front or something)

Lots of people think different things are "myths", make decisions based on the reality of the market not what you'd like it to be. If you think the market is wrong...guess what...the most likely scenario is that you are wrong

So if you own keywordkeyword.com then a search for keyword keyword puts me TOP of google.. Another myth debunked.

The market is what it is.

It is simply a statistical fact, more people buy long .com than shorter alt extensions.

And.. your point?

You can see the flawed logic here. You really wanted a Porsche, you couldn't afford it. Now you've convinced yourself the cheaper car is even better. I'm sorry but that is fooling yourself. I can't afford a Porsche either. That doesn't mean my 2001 Toyota is better, it is just more affordable. It is a cheap car.

No. I love my car. I would not trade it for a Porsche. Period. In fact, I chose it over a Porsche because it was cheaper and, in my mind, offered everything I wanted..

They won't be choosing between xxx.tv and a 4 word .com for reg fee, not realistic.

Then XXXX.TV

Probably a two word .com with cake in it that has a reasonable degree of fit. Cakecenter.com, Fastcakes.com etc.

What aftermarket should I go for.. I guess I could settle for TheFastCakes.com

Because the .tv market has underperformed over many years.

Not sure why this would make others happy?

That is a funny argument, perhaps in that case don't make silly comparisons?

Perhaps. Perhaps you could make more of an effort. Maybe we can compromise.

Only one post ago you said you'd bet on 99% of .com's falling value.

I also used the word POTENTIAL because you so clearly indicated that if I think things are wrong then I'm wrong.

No more posts. My brain cells are dying.

---------- Post added at 11:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:34 PM ----------

I forgot to add...

The Market has Peaked. Time for us to all go home.

 

[Jaco]

Most 3 word .com are valueless driven by the belief that Google will put you position one page one because "domain=search terms".

It's a myth perpetuated by domainers to sell to other domainers.

Actually, the domain itself does play a role in SE Algos. That isn't even debatable. The magnitude of that role is heavily debated, with some people claiming it's a substantial boost, while others claiming it's a modest piece of a larger puzzle, but *everyone* agrees that exact matching keyword domains provide a SE advantage for those keywords. In very weak keyword spaces, the exact-matching domain alone with bullshit ultralight development can be enough to get you to the P1 Promised-Land. In hotly contested spaces, it can be the advantage needed to top your competition.

"Domainer Mentality" places emphasis on how many words are in the domain and anything over a certain number is bad, but that's stupid. If three words comprise the commonly searched phrase, then that's the best domain to have to target that phrase and whatever keyword verticals are around it.

just like some .us people think .us will overtake .com

As someone who keeps up with .us and knows that space pretty well- in addition to being pretty familiar with it's players- I can assure you that no one but the fringiest of fringe proponents would ever begin to think that, nerveless say it out loud. You're really reaching for a left-field anomaly here.

 

[garptrader]

I believe there is a value in a recognizable authoritative phrase in a non-.COM domain which carries some weight versus a long spammy looking .COM domain. Example from one of my sites:

GAKT shows ~11 daily searches for the phrase/s "Pembroke Falls Aquatic/s Center" with my site being #5 in Google for that term. The city of Pembroke Pines site is #1 and should get a fair number of those visits. Interestingly I get about three visitors a day for that phrase which is more than one should probably expect given the search volume and my ranking for that phrase. How much influence does the PembrokePines.tv domain factor into that?

 

[donnied79]

I see you are talking about .com...
Well there is something to say. .com is not the king anymore but it will always be the most important domain extension.
I explain myself.
In Europe the main extensions are CCtld. In Italy all the main sites are .it, in Spain .es, in Ireland .ie in Netherlands .nl in Poland .pl in Germany .de etc. I use to travel a lot for working and everywhere I go the only thing I can see it's the local CCtld advertised.
And that makes the sum of all CCtld bigger than the .com
But we're living in the age of multinational companies and the main site will always be .com but it's not the one the companies use to sell. I can make tons of examples. Take Carrefour.com. It's the company website but the customers will go to Carrefour.it/fr whatever if they want specific informations.
That brings me to .tv
As I posted in the other thread during the NBA finals the website advertised to see match highlights was NBA.TV, not the .com
And the reason it's simple. All the people watching the finals recognize tv as television and that's why .tv can't have peaked. That doesn't mean it will replace .com, it's impossible, but it will grow and grow as CCtld did in this years.

 

[b2b]

I see you are talking about .com...
Well there is something to say. .com is not the king anymore but it will always be the most important domain extension.
I explain myself.
In Europe the main extensions are CCtld. In Italy all the main sites are .it, in Spain .es, in Ireland .ie in Netherlands .nl in Poland .pl in Germany .de etc. I use to travel a lot for working and everywhere I go the only thing I can see it's the local CCtld advertised.
And that makes the sum of all CCtld bigger than the .com
But we're living in the age of multinational companies and the main site will always be .com but it's not the one the companies use to sell. I can make tons of examples. Take Carrefour.com. It's the company website but the customers will go to Carrefour.it/fr whatever if they want specific informations.
That brings me to .tv
As I posted in the other thread during the NBA finals the website advertised to see match highlights was NBA.TV, not the .com
And the reason it's simple. All the people watching the finals recognize tv as television and that's why .tv can't have peaked. That doesn't mean it will replace .com, it's impossible, but it will grow and grow as CCtld did in this years.

Nice post.

BTW I thought you were younger. :D

 

[Premium.TV]

It doesn't matter the risk when you truly believe in something.

I think that it does matter to your wallet.
Those who dabble in domains as a hobby may think like that, but the serious domainers would rather earn than lose money.
In my view you are emotionally involved with the extension so you are bound to make decisions that are not rational from a business POV.

The problem,especially with domains is that people often don't fully understand the risk. I think that is due to them "truly believing" as you suggest, rather than understanding the downside aswell. If someone is completely certain about an investment then in my view that is someone who is not being realistic.

It's not about the money for me, it's about transforming the entire landscape of the market. I feel .TV has the capability of changing the way people communicate and will continue to endorse my plans without any hesitation.

 

[freedom30]

Nice post.

BTW I thought you were younger. :D

hey, what you talking about? He IS young!!!
...and he makes great sense sa well.