.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?

 

[DU]

and the world keeps spinning regardless of this thread

Segregation, determination, demonstration,
Integration, aggravation,
Humiliation, obligation to our nation
Ball of Confusion
That's what the world is today

---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:47 PM ----------

Just when I thought we were having a serious discussion.

I regretted that statement and I apologize. It was a result of what I view as nit picking statements out of a greater context.

I am breaking the internet down into smaller components. It's not just ONE thing in 2010. It's not just a browser and a keyboard anymore.

That's what domainers don't understand. It's not all about Google search which itself is beginning to adjust to the new dynamics of the way information and real life interact.

 

[snoop]

I am breaking the internet down into smaller components. It's not just ONE thing in 2010. It's not just a browser and a keyboard anymore.

That's what domainers don't understand. It's not all about Google search which itself is beginning to adjust to the new dynamics of the way information and real life interact.

All the philosophising in the world will not change the fact that this extension hasn't gone far in 14 years, it is what it is. In my view all the above arguments can be summarized down to two words: wishful thinking.

---------- Post added at 09:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:10 PM ----------

I regretted that statement and I apologize. It was a result of what I view as nit picking statements out of a greater context.

Ok, thanks for that.

 

[DU]

All the philosophising in the world will not change the fact that this extension hasn't gone far in 14 years, it is what it is. In my view all the above arguments can be summarized down to two words: wishful thinking.

It's not wishful thinking because I'm not set to make anything should it happen. All I get is a "told you so".

People said the same thing about Apple - a going nowhere company. Microsoft is kind of like the .com. Predictions of its demise are probably a little premature.

 

[Animator]

I wish people stop remembering .com and start remembering of .tv or .co

 

[snoop]

People said the same thing about Apple - a going nowhere company. Microsoft is kind of like the .com. Predictions of its demise are probably a little premature.

These types of comparisons don't mean much, you can just as easily find one with the opposite result. The fact is not much is happening with .tv as far as usage, and that has been the case for a long time. A great comeback story does not mean .tv is about to have a comeback or that one is likely, actually it never really arrived in the first place, not in a mainstream way.

Instead of worthless analogies and unrealistic comparisons lets look at the facts, what is really happening and make decisions based on that.

---------- Post added at 09:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:34 PM ----------

I wish people stop remembering .com and start remembering of .tv or .co

Might be better to "wish" for something that is likely, or even better focus your efforts on what actually works now.

 

[Animator]

Might be better to "wish" for something that is likely, or even better focus your efforts on what actually works now.

Do you believe .com will stay popular forever ?

ccTLDs are starting to catch up.

In europe 10 years ago .com was dominant, now i see more .eu .uk .es .fr .it .de and .tv then .com.

Why is this ?

 

[Kate]

In europe 10 years ago .com was dominant, now i see more .eu .uk .es .fr .it .de and .tv then .com.

These ccTLDs are successful because they have a large user base. For each country we are talking about tens of millions inhabitants.
They have a local market.

.tv's natural market is Tuvalu, other than that it's strictly a vanity extension (and need I say, not an all-purpose TLD). For that reason alone it's limited in growth.

Vanity extensions like .tv/.me can perform relatively well but not compete with non-vanity extensions.

Like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[freedom30]

Do you believe .com will stay popular forever ?...

No, it won't.

It will not be popular or dominant forever. It's just the nature of things and like it or not, extensions like .tv will become more and more in vogue as it is already taking a quantum leap into the mainstream.

Naysayers here appear humorous in their vain attempt to discourage or dissuade investors, which may have had a more direct impact before March 18 but now they are becoming more and more like a (distant)voice in the cyber wilderness, weeping and gnashing their collective teeth bemoaning those who chose .tv for whatever business reason.

Like I stated, everything changes and there is not much anyone can do about it as the negative propaganda has been weakened with recent actions by Verisgn...but you can't blame a soul(s) for trying, I guess.

It's just odd that anyone would even desire to try to rationalize with those who can't or won't see the 21st century taking its place in history. The naysayers are happily mired in the 20th century so rather than attempt to engage in a futile conversation I will just allow them their freedom to disparage and taunt those that choose to invest in the extension. They are, as I have stated earlier, rather humorous, after all.

 

[GoneWalkabout]

.tv's natural market is Tuvalu, other than that it's strictly a vanity extension (and need I say, not an all-purpose TLD). For that reason alone it's limited in growth.

Like comparing apples to oranges.

I feel your dislike of .tv (for reasons unknown) is blinding you to reality.

I would suggest it is more like comparing kiwi fruits to marangs than it is 'apples to oranges'.

Marangs are native to a certain area (Indonesia) and although people in other parts of the world have heard of them, and some people have come across them - they are not overly popular other than where they are grown. That is also a good description of most ccTLDs

Kiwi Fruits, on the other hand, are native to China but have had their name changed to suit a better marketing experience elsewhere (they were called Chinese Gooseberries). They are known everywhere and used everywhere - although they are not as mainstream as the more global fruits like apples and oranges. That is also a good description of .TV

No matter how often you WANT to think they are Chinese Gooseberries, and how factual your argument, the reality is that the world calls them kiwi fruits and has a use for them in every part of the world. They are not grown just in China, but everywhere and are gaining ground all the time.

The advantage .TV has over any other ccTLD is that the registry running it is the same as that for .com - has priced the extension to be sold globally - and the name is known in every single part of the world whether it be Argentina, Mexico, Canada, Poland, Russia, China, Japan, Botswana, India, wherever.

Europe has certainly adopted .TV as a cross-border extension, as has Latin America and Asia and many many other places...

If it looks like it, sounds like it, operates like it, and is regarded like it - then why go round pretending it is just a name for use by 12,000 people of Tuvalu!!! It's patently bigger than that.

 

[mwzd]

Very nice allegory Jimbo.

I'll take my Indian Kiwi (or Hindustan TV) as the case may be.

 

[discovernow]

For domains that I have for 10 years or more, I am seeing .com's type-in traffic decreasing for english names but not for spanish .com's.

My .tv type-ins increasing. 90% of my porfolio is .com, and the other 10% is mostly .tv with a few exceptions. I been around this business since 1998 so I am an expert, a guru, a visionary, a leader, "the most interesting man in the world, a brilliant mind (lol)

 

[Kate]

I feel your dislike of .tv (for reasons unknown) is blinding you to reality.

Believe it or not, I don't dislike .tv. It's just overrated in my view.
If there is one thing I don't like it's the way it's been run. But hey it's not my money

The advantage .TV has over any other ccTLD is that the registry running it is the same as that for .com - has priced the extension to be sold globally

Same registry, totally different contexts.
.com is regulated, .tv is unregulated.
As for the pricing policies, they have always been less favorable than in other extensions. Even the standard reg fee is significantly higher than .com for example.

and the name is known in every single part of the world whether it be Argentina, Mexico, Canada, Poland, Russia, China, Japan, Botswana, India, wherever.

Means nothing. Everybody is familiar with TV (equipment) but not with .tv.
It's like saying everybody knows or should know about .asia because they have heard of Asia (continent)

Europe has certainly adopted .TV as a cross-border extension, as has Latin America and Asia and many many other places...

It's not the first time somebody mentions that. I think it's another exaggerated claim.
I live in Europe, and I really don't see a lot of .tv being advertised, perhaps there have been a few adverts in magazines here and there (can't remember them though) but that's it.
I'm only familiar with arte.tv personally.

In Europe the local extensions are clearly dominant. .com is widespread too... and .eu is much more common than .tv.


Granted, .tv sites are less common but tend to be high profile. But not all TV stations/media producing companies use .tv either. It's not like it's the gold standard to them.

 

[eyedomainous]

I finally voted on this (baited) question. My vote is 'NO', bringing the official total to 50.

The reasons:
1). I like the number 50.
2). Only about 7% of people online, worldwide, have a broadband connection. As the ability to operate a TV site that can actually deliver and receive video streams increases so to will the market for .TV, and related, domains.

Chances are this factor came up earlier in the thread. If so, my vote is also in support of that rationale.

 

[snoop]

Do you believe .com will stay popular forever ?

ccTLDs are starting to catch up.

In europe 10 years ago .com was dominant, now i see more .eu .uk .es .fr .it .de and .tv then .com.

Why is this ?

I think .com will be the dominant tld for as long as domains are used. Eventually though I think there will be a shift to something else (don't ask me to what or when I don't know).

Regarding country codes 10 years ago they were extensively used. As far as I know .de and .co.uk were the dominant tlds in those coutries back then. In Australia for example .com.au has been the main tld for along as I can remember, in New Zealand the same is true of .co.nz.

So I ask this question, were you in Europe 10 years ago or is this what you think may have happened? Do you have knowledge to make the statement above or is this something you have made up or heard someone else say?

I think though the market share of cc tlds has risen mainly due to more local companies coming online and using them, but it is only a handful of extension that have any kind of liquid market for domainers, those extension make up most of the sales. So when people talk about cctlds doing well I think it is really only .de, .co.uk and some others where there is really clear opportunities for domainers. If you were to say the total market for cc tlds is as large as .com which some claim that is a market split between over 200 extensions.

Lastly .tv is only a ctld in a techincal sense, the characteristics are totally different to .de, .co.uk etc.

---------- Post added at 05:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:01 PM ----------

It's just the nature of things and like it or not, extensions like .tv will become more and more in vogue as it is already taking a quantum leap into the mainstream.

I think it is folly to read changes at the domainer level as changes in actual usage. In my view this is an argument from the year 2000.

---------- Post added at 05:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:07 PM ----------

For domains that I have for 10 years or more, I am seeing .com's type-in traffic decreasing for english names but not for spanish .com's.

My .tv type-ins increasing. 90% of my porfolio is .com, and the other 10% is mostly .tv with a few exceptions. I been around this business since 1998 so I am an expert, a guru, a visionary, a leader, "the most interesting man in the world, a brilliant mind (lol)

Have you ever seen a .tv domain for sale with with parking revenue attached? I haven't other than typos. Personally I doubt there is accuracy in the concept of .tv type in traffic increasing. Even many hardened cheerleaders will admit there really isn't any natural type in traffic.

Regarding .com type in traffic I think the statement is probaly right. I think that is related to the increasing use of search engines at the expense of domains generally. ie the domain isn't as important as in the past.

 

[freedom30]

...In my view this is an argument from the year 2000.

:lol:...and the inimitable Don Quixote returns once again, riding his ass backwards as is his wont!

 

[discovernow]

I think .com will be the dominant tld for as long as domains are used. Eventually though I think there will be a shift to something else (don't ask me to what or when I don't know).

Regarding country codes 10 years ago they were extensively used. As far as I know .de and .co.uk were the dominant tlds in those coutries back then. In Australia for example .com.au has been the main tld for along as I can remember, in New Zealand the same is true of .co.nz.

So I ask this question, were you in Europe 10 years ago or is this what you think may have happened? Do you have knowledge to make the statement above or is this something you have made up or heard someone else say?

I think though the market share of cc tlds has risen mainly due to more local companies coming online and using them, but it is only a handful of extension that have any kind of liquid market for domainers, those extension make up most of the sales. So when people talk about cctlds doing well I think it is really only .de, .co.uk and some others where there is really clear opportunities for domainers. If you were to say the total market for cc tlds is as large as .com which some claim that is a market split between over 200 extensions.

Lastly .tv is only a ctld in a techincal sense, the characteristics are totally different to .de, .co.uk etc.

---------- Post added at 05:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:01 PM ----------



I think it is folly to read changes at the domainer level as changes in actual usage. In my view this is an argument from the year 2000.

---------- Post added at 05:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:07 PM ----------



Have you ever seen a .tv domain for sale with with parking revenue attached? I haven't other than typos. Personally I doubt there is accuracy in the concept of .tv type in traffic increasing. Even many hardened cheerleaders will admit there really isn't any natural type in traffic.

Regarding .com type in traffic I think the statement is probaly right. I think that is related to the increasing use of search engines at the expense of domains generally. ie the domain isn't as important as in the past.

Snoop,

I only go by what I see in my portfolio in both .tv and .com

 

[snoop]

Snoop,

I only go by what I see in my portfolio in both .tv and .com

Maybe that is the problem, how many names is your sample based on? what kind of revenue is it based on? Personally I've never seen anything to suggest .tv domain get much type in traffic, other than typo/confusion traffic names (which is the case for all extensions).

 

[DU]

I think .com will be the dominant tld for as long as domains are used. Eventually though I think there will be a shift to something else (don't ask me to what or when I don't know).

What was that you said about predictions? :bingo:

These types of comparisons don't mean much, you can just as easily find one with the opposite result. The fact is not much is happening with .tv as far as usage, and that has been the case for a long time. A great comeback story does not mean .tv is about to have a comeback or that one is likely, actually it never really arrived in the first place, not in a mainstream way.

What I find most amusing about you is that you argue against any future predictions but you fail to have any insight into the future. You don't/won't look past 2015 like it's too much risk - the above nebulous statement notwithstanding. Though that statement is a moral victory for me.

I have tried to make some suggestions how to web abstraction might work and have an influence on things in a domaining context - this might be totally wrong but it is information that people can take for what it is and apply it to the great collective of influence that exists here, and elsewhere.

But anyway, the future won't remove domains - just removes how they are resolved in the context of HCI. Uniform Resource Identifier will *always* be required and to be named.

But can I ask where the point is in discussing the future without someone who has an aversion to both future predictions and believes all historical and current analogies to be frought with inaccuracies?

What should we use as the discussion points? We need comparisons as input into the intellectual machine. The current tells us nothing except where history got us. The future can only be projected based on trends and analysis and a collection of strategic thinking.

No business knows where we WILL BE in 2015....but many are guiding us there anyway. How are they doing this? By looking at the current? looking at the past? looking at what they were/are and seeing what they want to be? It's a constant comparison of apples to avocados, kiwis to kumquats, pomegranetes to pummelos.... it's all data, it all applies.

The world is in trouble if we fail to acknowledge that comparisons while not providing definitive answers provide interesting analytical fodder.

In order to explain one is often forced to go towards comparisons or analogies to provide a basis for the position. Without this type of analysis there are very few discussions worth having because there is an absense of defensibility. In this case : Microsoft v Apple, the comparison was meant more about about .com's longevity than .TV's resurgence so I guess it's nice to see you apply the same rules to any defense of .com as well as .tv.

For all its wants and all its fans, Apple is STILL NO Microsoft.

Given that history can't be used to gauge the future as it is an invalid time comparison, I guess we'll all have to just sit around and see what happens.

Yes. I have a hard time sticking to "my last post". I suck. :lol:

---------- Post added at 06:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------

Maybe that is the problem, how many names is your sample based on? what kind of revenue is it based on? Personally I've never seen anything to suggest .tv domain get much type in traffic, other than typo/confusion traffic names (which is the case for all extensions).

You've never seen anything personally? Based on how many names in your sample?

I'll save you the effort to say it: Touché!

Find it interesting that you think a .TV is "typo" traffic. Can't say I've ever typed in .TV by mistake...
:sold:

 

[snoop]

What was that you said about predictions? :bingo:

He asked me my opinion and I gave it, never said people should follow it. Note also I was commenting about some relying on multiple unlikely predictions strung together.

What I find most amusing about you is that you argue against any future predictions but you fail to have any insight into the future. You don't/won't look past 2015 like it's too much risk - the above nebulous statement notwithstanding. Though that statement is a moral victory for me.

Right, I make decisions based on here and now. Do something that works today, make money today. Don't peg you business model on a gamble.

I have tried to make some suggestions how to web abstraction might work and have an influence on things in a domaining context - this might be totally wrong but it is information that people can take for what it is and apply it to the great collective of influence that exists here, and elsewhere.

Translation please.

But anyway, the future won't remove domains - just removes how they are resolved in the context of HCI. Uniform Resource Identifier will *always* be required and to be named.

Who cares what any of us think about the future, some of us will be wrong and some right. If you are sure of anything that is dangerous though. I'm not sure of anything in the future I have an opinion, but it could be completely wrong, that is why I make decisions based on today.

But can I ask where the point is in discussing the future without someone who has an aversion to both future predictions and believes all historical and current analogies to be frought with inaccuracies?

This is the key point: discuss today. It is the closest to the future we'll ever know.

What should we use as the discussion points?

The situation today and how things have gone in the past.

No business knows where we WILL BE in 2015....but many are guiding us there anyway. How are they doing this? By looking at the current? looking at the past? looking at what they were/are and seeing what they want to be? It's a constant comparison of apples to avocados, kiwis to kumquats, pomegranetes to pummelos.... it's all data, it all applies.

The problem is forecasters tend to wrong 50% of the time.

In order to explain one is often forced to go towards comparisons or analogies to provide a basis for the position. Without this type of analysis there are very few discussions worth having because there is an absense of defensibility. In this case : Microsoft v Apple, the comparison was meant more about about .com's longevity than .TV's resurgence so I guess it's nice to see you apply the same rules to any defense of .com as well as .tv.

The analogies are usually BS and chosen simply to evoke a certain point of view.

Like .tv? Then start comparing it to the Apple comeback.
Doesn't like .tv? Compare it enron, the video cassette, whatever else never came back.

All these comparisons are rubbish, on both sides of the fence.

For all its wants and all its fans, Apple is STILL NO Microsoft.

Who cares.

Given that history can't be used to gauge the future as it is an invalid time comparison, I guess we'll all have to just sit around and see what happens.

The most appropriate history to discuss is the history of .tv and to a lesser extent the history of other extensions, not the history of Apple, not the history of the video cassette.

You've never seen anything personally? Based on how many names in your sample?

0, because I've never seen any. I base my opinion on 10 years of hanging around domain forums and never having seen a .tv domain sold with geneuine natural type in traffic. I also base it on some people with large .tv portfolios saying the same thing. If I'd seen .tv in the past with genuine revenue from natural type in traffic I probably would have bought some.

Find it interesting that you think a .TV is "typo" traffic. Can't say I've ever typed in .TV by mistake...
:sold:

I'm saying the domains out there in .tv land, with type in traffic are typos of developed .tv sites or confusion traffic. I've never come accross a name with natural typo traffic, maybe sex.tv would or something like that, but I don't think it goes much farther than that. When people saying natural type in traffic is increasing in .tv I think it is nonsense because there is just about nothing to begin with.

 

[DU]

Right, I make decisions based on here and now. Do something that works today, make money today. Don't peg you business model on a gamble.

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.

Translation please.

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.

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

Who cares what any of us think about the future, some of us will be wrong and some right. If you are sure of anything that is dangerous though. I'm not sure of anything in the future I have an opinion, but it could be completely wrong, that is why I make decisions based on today.

So perhaps the thread title was incomplete:

Has the .TV maket peaked? Please don't consider anything that may happen in the future.

Yes. Right now at this very moment in time, this second, it is at its peak within standard deviation.

This is the key point: discuss today. It is the closest to the future we'll ever know.

The situation today and how things have gone in the past.

The past is nearly always MORE irrelevant than the future.

The problem is forecasters tend to wrong 50% of the time.

As are historians.

The analogies are usually BS and chosen simply to evoke a certain point of view.

Like .tv? Then start comparing it to the Apple comeback.
Doesn't like .tv? Compare it enron, the video cassette, whatever else never came back.

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.

All these comparisons are rubbish, on both sides of the fence.

Who cares.

The most appropriate history to discuss is the history of .tv and to a lesser extent the history of other extensions, not the history of Apple, not the history of the video cassette.

So you don't care. Why ask the question then? If I am wasting your time let me know and I WILL stop posting.

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

You just asked me recently who has an online strategy that I would follow. Was this somehow more relevant? Using your argument, who cares? They're one company that has revenue of Billions - this has absolutely ZERO relevance to me or .TV given they are Apple.com

I can see how the question can elicit some interesting opionon discussion.

0, because I've never seen any. I base my opinion on 10 years of hanging around domain forums and never having seen a .tv domain sold with geneuine natural type in traffic. I also base it on some people with large .tv portfolios saying the same thing. If I'd seen .tv in the past with genuine revenue from natural type in traffic I probably would have bought some.

You had me at 0.