.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?

 

[snoop]

That philosphy worked great with real estate. It's a sure thing. Works today... makes money today.

I presume that you must have a 401K (or equivalent) that has fully avoided all stock based categories and only invests in the 100% fully backed bonds.

I know very little about the American propety market so I can't really comment on that.

Having said that price appreciation does not mean something works as a business. Speculating on price increases is not a business model.

Speculating on .tv names going up in value when there is no revenue and the names have done poorly for the 10 years previous isn't a business model either, neither is buying 3 letter .com's for the same purpose (though it least it has a track record). A successful business model is where you make money today based on system that works.

I see things that are changing NOW (that you might not) that WILL change (that you don't see) and explain how these changes have an impact on today. This discussion can then be used as an input into the working brain of any individual trying to make decisions.

Lots of domainers over time think they can see something with the logical conclusion that they must by domains in extension "XXX". I'm yet to hear of anyone who has focused on some particular extension because of changes they thought were coming actually getting anywhere. Lots have tried with .tv, .mobi, .biz, .info, .us, .cc, .ws.

Critical Thinking is a lost skill. It's the taking of multiple view points and trying to reach conclusions.

Let me guess, you have that skill but I don't?

In my example, I wasn't comparing .TV to Apple. I was comparing peoples VIEW on Apple and Microsoft. Human behaviour is very relevant when discussing topics based on opinion - and often that behaviour isn't as dynamic as other variables.

Domainers must stop making comparisons merely because it suits there arguments. This isn't thinking. It is pointless comparing .tv to Apple.

Why ask the question then? If I am wasting your time let me know and I WILL stop posting.

I didn't ask the question, I'm saying domainers need to stop making worthless comparisons.

Why Betamax failed is a case study for how NOT to launch a product. It is extremely relevant. Why Apple succeeded is relevant.

Both are completely irrelvant. Domainers use them as extremely weak comparisons.

.tv will do well because Apple had a comeback.

.tv won't do well even if it is better extension because of Betamax.

All these compariusons added togerher result in nothing at all. It is a waste of time thinking them up, and a waste of words writing about them. Decide whether you think .tv will do well based on logical reasons, not because Apple had a comeback, not because betamax failed.

You just asked me recently who has an online strategy that I would follow.

Where did I ask this? I said find a business model that works. Your model, one that applies to you, one that works today. That does not mean study Apple, they aren't .tv domain speculators.

 

[DU]

Having said that price appreciation does not mean something works as a business. Speculating on price increases is not a business model.

I'll be sure to ask my brokers and my bank what the hell they think they're letting me do with my money.

Let me guess, you have that skill but I don't?

I said nothing of the sort. I said that without information you can't make critical thinking decisions.

Domainers must stop making comparisons merely because it suits there arguments. This isn't thinking. It is pointless comparing .tv to Apple.

The horse is not moving. Called. 3.13am

It is a waste of time thinking them up, and a waste of words writing about them.

Thanks for indirectly answering my other question.

 

[GoneWalkabout]

Personally I've never seen anything to suggest .tv domain get much type in traffic

I would normally agree with this but things are changing.

A member here called Mulligan once posted figures about a name he bought called PRO tv - very impressive figures. I am also aware that the name was certainly discussed on a forum you yourself owned.

The name is now in my possession and the figures are still impressive today.

I also own a couple of other names whose figures are quite astounding for what, I too had regarded as type-in-traffic free .tv names. One name Khan TV has me bemused, as does Piles TV as they continually get what feels like unnaturally high numbers.

I can concur with DiscoverNow that .TV traffic is on the increase in general. Still, no where near enough to pay for the domain itself (although I have several that easily do so). This should be seen in the light that in many other extensions figures and revenue are dropping.

I also believe that you yourself Snoop actually peddle in typos and your reason for this is solely for traffic. So there must be at least 50 plus names on .TV that have high traffic and good revenues - otherwise you wold have dumped them a long time ago - and then publicly slagged off .tv for that reason as well.

 

[freedom30]

You had me at 0.

:hehe:

 

[snoop]

I would normally agree with this but things are changing.

A member here called Mulligan once posted figures about a name he bought called PRO tv - very impressive figures. I am also aware that the name was certainly discussed on a forum you yourself owned.

This is what I mean by confusion traffic. The names that are reported as getting traffic are isolated and random, it is because of sites with similar names being developed. In this case it is people looking for protv.ro which is a very popular site of one of the biggest TV channels in Romania. That happens in all extensions. Pro.tv getting traffic doesn't say anything for other .tv domains because most get no traffic worth talking about (I'm talking about the high quality .tv's here). It says something for pro.tv and the popularity of the the tv station Pro tv.

One name Khan TV has me bemused, as does Piles TV as they continually get what feels like unnaturally high numbers.

Unnatural, that is the key term.

I also believe that you yourself Snoop actually peddle in typos and your reason for this is solely for traffic. So there must be at least 50 plus names on .TV that have high traffic and good revenues - otherwise you wold have dumped them a long time ago - and then publicly slagged off .tv for that reason as well.

There is probably thousands of .tv names with traffic. You could say the same thing about most other medium sized alt extensions, .us, .info etc. It doesn't mean type in traffic is increasing or that people are going to .tv domains because they think there will naturally be a site there.