.tv Having your .tv realization moment...

[snoop]

A little story:

I remember when I was in my teens, in the early nineties, I was a huge Amiga fan. I used to buy all the magazines (probably spent $50 a month), oodled at the machines in the shops, think about buying every add on out there and would recommend the machine to friends. I was a fanatic, a one eyed supporter, loyal.

Around 1992-1993 I decided it was time to upgrade from my Amiga 500, a great machine but I wanted something better. If I remember rightly I was going to spent something like $1500 on a new Amiga 1200, it had a 20mb hard drive, I think was about 15mhz and 2 gb of ram. The machine wasn’t cheap and addons were somewhat limited and pricey. I was getting very close to buying one and living that dream was about to head to the shop. I was flicking through the computer section of the local newspaper. At that time you could get a 25mghz 486sx with 4mb of ram and a 80mb hard drive for about the same price.

That is when I had my realization moment.

“I’m getting less than half the machine for the same price”
“Wtf am I doing?”

Because I am a fan of something I’d buy a machine that most sane people would consider outdated and overpriced? Is that rational?

That was when I decided my misplaced sense of loyalty was costing me money and it was time to ditch that loyalty. The Amiga isn’t my best friend, my brother or an employer who has helped me out, it is freaking piece of machinery!

I headed out to the local shop and bought a PC, I never regretted it though to this day I still check out some of the Amiga sites online.

So the question is, how much is your loyalty to .tv costing your hip pocket? Are you making bad financial decision for emotional reasons? Do you see yourself as an unpaid .tv ambassador?

Reg fees at least double, poor performing tld, after 10 years it never quite turned out as expected….hmm is this the Amiga of the domain world?

 

[namenut]

Any financial decision driven by emotion is simply poor
business sense whether it is for a domain name or a truck.

Hmmm .... what would be the value of that "Amiga" today?
Seems the buy and hold for 10 years analogy might be a bit
ironic and ... apropos.

Where were you when I was chasing loose women with even
looser cash? :]

NN

 

[freedom30]

I just read your analogy with much interest and a certain amount of reservation.

It's not 100% but few things ever are. You're acute obsession to attempt to drive away any potential investors to this extension is really, and I mean this sincerely, quite profound, my dear doctor.

You have single-handedly interpreted the fascination of investors and speculators to the .tv phenonemon and entwined it to your own regressive technological experience of your youth. An epiphany must have ensued when you came to the realization that time does indeed move forward, as the techno-evolution existed even then. I am beginning to see the pattern here, even as Don Quixote drifts into the nether-land of cyberspace and Dr. Snoopmund Freud emerges.

What analyses we have in store for us. What doors he will open to hidden passages and tales of failed enterprises and portents and omens of dire warnings.

Dr Freud, we welcome you into our abode and listen with keen ear for we are ready to learn. We hope that you do the same.

---------- Post added at 09:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:56 PM ----------

...Where were you when I was chasing loose women with even
looser cash? :]

NN

Hey, don't pick on the Doc, he was with his amiga(sp).

(Don't be mad, Snoop, no offense, I couldn't resist the punchline(amiga spanish for girlfriend)!

 

[DnEbook]

i happily have a few that i feel fit the extension , simple really

 

[hullswingerscom]

i also had a spectrum,amiga and moved on to a pc
maybe we will see some good sales on dot tv soon maybe not who knows!

why did i go for dot tv...cos 3dfilm.tv fits better then most coms i can find.

good post snoop.

 

[gr8trfoo]

Around 1992-1993 I decided it was time to upgrade from my Amiga 500,

If you had an Amiga in 92 what was the serial number?

 

[snoop]

If you had an Amiga in 92 what was the serial number?

No idea. Probably a very big number.

---------- Post added at 02:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 AM ----------

Hmmm .... what would be the value of that "Amiga" today?
Seems the buy and hold for 10 years analogy might be a bit
ironic and ... N

I think very little, the better models (esp the rare ones) seem to be collected to some degree though.

 

[MillersCrossing]

if you had an amiga in 92 what was the serial number?

comedy gold finster!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

5 stars and a long memory!!!!!

Dont mess with the fin!!

 

[Argos]

I have some reserve about the analogy but acceptable. Thank you Snoop for having initiated this discussion. To use the same analogy I could see .com as the affordable popular ibm/pc operating system, and .tv as Apple, more expensive and initially dedicated to multimedia applications. The issue here is that Verisign owning the two extensions were unable to hire the services of the appropriate 'Steve Jobs' to develop a proper .tv market at the time when video began to invade the web. In other words, and to continue the analogy, the terrific iMac success for Apple was the ChannelMe disaster for Verisign. :bingo:

 

[MillersCrossing]

I have some reserve about the analogy but acceptable. Thank you Snoop for having initiated this discussion. To use the same analogy I could see .com as the affordable popular ibm/pc operating system, and .tv as Apple, more expensive and initially dedicated to multimedia applications. The issue here is that Verisign owning the two extensions were unable to hire the services of the appropriate 'Steve Jobs' to develop a proper .tv market at the time when video began to invade the web. In other words, and to continue the analogy, the terrific iMac success for Apple was the ChannelMe disaster for Verisign. :bingo:

And then some...

 

[Kate]

Any financial decision driven by emotion is simply poor business sense whether it is for a domain name or a truck.

You've nailed it.

Now, the registry always gets a lot of blame for the way the extension is managed, but I think we should also look at .tv for what is is, a niche extension and not a general purpose one.
By that logic, the market is not infinite. Sure, non-regulation and 'zany' pricing don't help the market but that cannot account for 100% of the extension's woes.

In my view it has always been clear that .tv is and remains a branded ccTLD akin to .me. In spite of that I would say it's been more successful than its siblings at this game. It has achieved a level of recognition within its own niche, frankly we are not in the same league as .ws or .cc. But just because we are fond of a particular extension does not mean it is a good investment.

Still, based on what I've seen at NP there are worse extensions/niches than .tv to invest in... :]

 

[Len]

I have some reserve about the analogy but acceptable. Thank you Snoop for having initiated this discussion. To use the same analogy I could see .com as the affordable popular ibm/pc operating system, and .tv as Apple, more expensive and initially dedicated to multimedia applications. The issue here is that Verisign owning the two extensions were unable to hire the services of the appropriate 'Steve Jobs' to develop a proper .tv market at the time when video began to invade the web. In other words, and to continue the analogy, the terrific iMac success for Apple was the ChannelMe disaster for Verisign. :bingo:

Exactly my thoughts on this.... The problem has been the lack of proper marketing especially as the internet has turned into a visual and socially acceptable place to view anything that can be filmed or televised.

The market is massive and if anyone in Verisign with half a brain and a bit of foresight had grabbed the bull by the horns the extension would/could have been leading the way for visual internet.

It is my belief that it is not too late but .tv needs some serious marketing if it is going to be as big as we would all like to see.

 

[snoop]

I have some reserve about the analogy but acceptable. Thank you Snoop for having initiated this discussion. To use the same analogy I could see .com as the affordable popular ibm/pc operating system, and .tv as Apple, more expensive and initially dedicated to multimedia applications. The issue here is that Verisign owning the two extensions were unable to hire the services of the appropriate 'Steve Jobs' to develop a proper .tv market at the time when video began to invade the web. In other words, and to continue the analogy, the terrific iMac success for Apple was the ChannelMe disaster for Verisign. :bingo:

The example is really about having a misplaced sense of loyalty and how that can result in bad decision making. It really stems from Jimbo seeing himself and others as in the role of "ambassadors of .tv", unless Verisign is paying you a salary then being an ambassador makes no sense. Go with what gives the best financial outcome for you.

 

[eyedomainous]

The example is really about having a misplaced sense of loyalty and how that can result in bad decision making. It really stems from Jimbo seeing himself and others as in the role of "ambassadors of .tv", unless Verisign is paying you a salary then being an ambassador makes no sense. Go with what gives the best financial outcome for you.

Having a misplaced sense of loyalty makes a good point, but your analogy also makes it clear you were an ambassador for Amiga, then with the realization that the PC was a better value you, simply by saying... "i went out and bought a PC", became an ambassador for the PC (over say a Mac).

We are all ambassadors of the products we buy and the services we use... as our purchases are brands that show others who we are and what we chose over all the others.

And, of course, people appointed to be 'real' Ambassadors pay, in some way, for the post.

Pay is rarely a motivation in becoming an Ambassador, of anything. Its about respected individuals publicly supporting something they believe in. So Jimbo is an Ambassador of .TV (period)

 

[snoop]

Having a misplaced sense of loyalty makes a good point, but your analogy also makes it clear you were an ambassador for Amiga, then with the realization that the PC was a better value you, simply by saying... "i went out and bought a PC", became an ambassador for the PC (over say a Mac).

Being an ambassdor means promoting it to others, someone who "represents" it to the exclusion of the competition. Like Steve Jobs represents Apple. I've never been fanctical about pc's and having that misguided view about Amigas almost caused me to buy something most would say is badly overpriced (indeed Commodore folded 2 years later so the rest of the world was probably thinking it was ovepriced and dated aswell).

Most people just buy what is the best value, rather than being fanatical about it. It is a bit like the guy who drools over a certain car versus the guy who just buys a car because it was cheap and uses less gas. Being fanatical/one eyed is ok if it is in relation to a hobby or sports team etc, but not as far as business investments go. That is unless you own a big chuck of the company like Steve Jobs, in that case you're the paid promoter.

---------- Post added at 05:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:56 PM ----------

So Jimbo is an Ambassador of .TV (period)

Agree with that part. The question is does in make financial sense or is it misguided loyalty?

 

[MillersCrossing]

This conversation has now got alot broader in what the definition of an ambassador really means.

Take Guy Kawasaki as an example: in an excerpt from Wiki: " Guy Kawasaki was one of the Apple employees originally responsible for marketing the Macintosh in 1984. He is noted for having brought the concept of evangelism, initially focused on creating passionate user-advocates for the Apple brand, to the high-tech business.

Creation of user advocates sounds suspiciously close to creating ambassadors.....

Would you even attempt to say that owners of Harley Davidsons are not ambassadors of the bike? And that their buying of the bike, or the $400 HD leather jackets are all buying decisions based on emotion rather than rational decision making when the jackets cost $100 next door but without the HL logo on it?

Ambassadors do not have to be paid thats for sure but it can help.

Back to Allthings.TV. Both Kevin and I had numerous telephone conversations with Quinn Daly to sponsor Allthings.Tv as we were getting a huge amount of traffic once we started getting some big time interviews for the blog.

After alot of yesses, came alot of stalling, followed by a lot of excuses, but bottom line we did not get the sponsorship. It was then that I decided that I was no longer an ambassador.

We were doing more work than Demand Media were doing to market .tv, and they saw no value in sponsoring the blog - makes no sense.....

Kevin even went to the "launch party" to interview Quinn and Rosenblatt..didn't make a jot of difference. YouTube - AllThings.tv interview with Quinn Daly of Demand Media

So I believe that the best companies in the world use the creation of "user advocates" as part of their marketing strategies, those who are not prepared to think outside the box or take a long term view will not care and take the cheapest route to sell a product or a service. IMHO

 

[poiuytrewq]

So the question is, how much is your loyalty to .tv costing your hip pocket? Are you making bad financial decision for emotional reasons? Do you see yourself as an unpaid .tv ambassador?

Reg fees at least double, poor performing tld, after 10 years it never quite turned out as expected….hmm is this the Amiga of the domain world?

I'd say the Sinclair C5 of the domain world.

Not costing me a penny because I realized a while back that this extension was dead in the water. I did try quite hard to get the message over on this forum and for my efforts got puerile PMs telling me that I seem to have an attitude problem.

Not an attitude problem, simply being pragmatic. Quite why people are still bothering with it is beyond me when the evidence for failure is there for all to see. I came to the conclusion years ago that domainers just like wasting money.

Let's finish with a few cliches...

Dot TV could have been a contender, but at the end of the day you can't polish a turd.

 

[Kate]

Would you even attempt to say that owners of Harley Davidsons are not ambassadors of the bike? And that their buying of the bike, or the $400 HD leather jackets are all buying decisions based on emotion rather than rational decision making when the jackets cost $100 next door but without the HL logo on it?

I would say that HD owners simply fulfill their hobby/passion through their purchases.
They won't claim it's an 'investment'. They may build valuable collections in some cases, still that does not mean they could resell at a profit.

 

[freedom30]

It looks like the doctor is doing well on his thread...

patients seen...

sdsinc
clipster
Millsey
len
argos
finny
hullsey
evirtual
freedom
namenutz...this list continues to grow

nice practice, doc. Keep up the good work! We like it!
a practice where the patients actually treat the doctor as well!

 

[*AllThings.tv*]

Back to Allthings.TV. Both Kevin and I had numerous telephone conversations with Quinn Daly to sponsor Allthings.Tv as we were getting a huge amount of traffic once we started getting some big time interviews for the blog.

After alot of yesses, came alot of stalling, followed by a lot of excuses, but bottom line we did not get the sponsorship. It was then that I decided that I was no longer an ambassador.

We were doing more work than Demand Media were doing to market .tv, and they saw no value in sponsoring the blog - makes no sense.....

Kevin even went to the "launch party" to interview Quinn and Rosenblatt..didn't make a jot of difference. YouTube - AllThings.tv interview with Quinn Daly of Demand Media

I do not feel this is a completely accurate nor do I agree with the statements above.

* - Huge amount of traffic is subjective, I know, but Dot TV, Development, and Strategy on AllThings.tv has more traffic today than it did during the period that James references, and today that traffic is not 'Huge'.

* - Demand Media, Quinn, nor any other representative from the company said 'Yes' to any sponsorship proposal. They took it under consideration and ultimately declined. We don't know whether Demand Media disliked the blog, the content, or either one of the two guys who were behind it.

* - James isn't familiar with EVERY thing that Demand Media did or was doing to advance dot tv at the time and any statement to the contrary is absolutely false.

* - My interview with Quinn and Richard were for the promotion of our site and nothing more. Quinn was gracious enough to invite us to the launch party and give me and my camera crew VIP access.