.tv In Regard to TV & Google Thread

[mckennaronnie]

Hey,

The TV and Google thread obviously is very interesting & worrying: Link to thread

Although this thread does bring up some worries about developing a .tv & trying to get traffic, i think it's important that all the newbie developers don't blame 'TV & Google' as to why they get bad traffic.

Of course this is not aimed at those who know all about getting great search results & traffic, more to new developers as a few of them seem to want to blame Google and TV for many things and make .tv's unworkable in their eyes.

IF you have a .Tv domains, built a site (or had it build for you), added the content and are waiting for the traffic to flood in after you suddenly appear in the 1st page of Google & yahoo for your search term.
IF you dont appear on the 1st page then don't automatically blame Googles perception of .tv's.
Fistly think about SEO, backlinks, age of site...etc
Think "Why should my site come up before xxxx others site for that search term"
Your competitors have most likely been around for a while, have spent a lot of time on their content, worked on SEO & setting the right keywords & meta tags, exchanged backlinks...etc

ONLY once you have done all this, you are sitting high up in Yahoo for your search term then can you think "Why am i not doing well in Google & no doubt the 'Tv and Google' thread wil help.

You can just buy a keyword or Geo .tv, start a site and expect to sit high in search engines just because you want to. Your competitors also want to, they have been at it a long time, they have done everything possible to get high rankings and traffic.

Doesnt matter if you own a .com, .net, .org or .Tv - You will ALWAYS struggle if you dont do the basics.

Don't blame all your traffic problems on Google unless you have done the work and you are sitting high in other search engines.

Just my observation on how a few of the 'I cant sell so I'm a developer' newbies are reading this 'Tv and Google' thread so now blaming Google before looking at their own site and why should it get high search results.

Cheers,
Ronnie

**I am of course worried about Googles problems ranking .tv's but we small time, niche developers are not really the ones affected so do the SEO work, outdo your competitors and get on with it. IMHO
Don't just open the site and expect to come up before 1000's of other sites in the search engines because you want it, its hard work!!

 

[.tv]

Doesnt matter if you own a .com, .net, .org or .Tv - You will ALWAYS struggle if you dont do the basics.

Don't blame all your traffic problems on Google unless you have done the work and you are sitting high in other search engines.

Word.

 

[localexperts]

Agreed. My purpose was the raise awareness of the issue in the hope that we might get some resolution.

But if you don't do the basics - You have no hope to rank well on other search engines which do rank .TV sites well.

You can look at this quantcast of my GEO .TVs
http://www.quantcast.com/p-fbWv4nOxnFXlw/traffic/sites

Despite challenges, there is an ability to get traffic to .TV domains if you do the blocking and tackling. This is all organic traffic. No SEM.

 

[soggyindo]

hmm, not sure why we've split the thread here, could get confusing?

i think the point here isn't "my .tv isn't getting traffic", but rather - "my .tv isn't getting traffic, but my .net is getting loads of traffic, with all other factors the same."

if a basic .TV disadvantage exists we need to examine it fully - even if we've invested and risk scaring the market. we're all spending real money and time here, and need facts to work with.

of course we need some real figures to back all this up. Developing two equal names/ fresh regs would be great. But publishing them here before hand would push up the stats artificially, yes?

even if we can't get it together to do that, some anecdotal evidence of some .tvs at #1 position for competitive keywords would be a start. i can't think of any off hand (even for new terms where there is no age discrimination for .TV...)

am i right in reading the linked quantcast figures above as an average of 2 uniques per day, per site? i might be reading that completely wrong. but if so - that's a very low figure for parking an average .com - and they are gorgeous, linked, full sites on great names.

cheers to everyone contributing to this discussion, super valuable for everyone involved IMO

 

[mckennaronnie]

hmm, not sure why we've split the thread here, could get confusing?

i think the point here isn't "my .tv isn't getting traffic", but rather - "my .tv isn't getting traffic, but my .net is getting loads of traffic, with all other factors the same."

if a basic .TV disadvantage exists we need to make sure we don't sugarcoat it - even if we risk scaring the market. we're all spending real money and time here, and need facts to work with.

i think we need some real figures to back this up. Developing two equal names/ fresh regs would be great, but publishing them here before hand would push up the stats artificially.

even if we can't get it together to do that, some anecdotal evidence of some .tvs at #1 position for competitive keywords would be a start. i can't think of any, even for new terms where there is no age discrimination...

cheers to everyone contributing to this discussion

I split the thread as users were using 'Google hates .tv' in multiple threads and blaming Google on everything. With commesnts in appraisal threads like "How will you get traffic when Google hates .tv's"

The other thread is great, great tpic with some wonderful arguements but others who maybe dont have the same experience are using that thread to explain any & every problem their .tv domains/sites have.
The last thing we need is ANOTHER subject for multiple users whoa re down on .tv right now to repeat in many unrelated threads. All IMHO

Agreed. My purpose was the raise awareness of the issue in the hope that we might get some resolution.

But if you don't do the basics - You have no hope to rank well on other search engines which do rank .TV sites well.

You can look at this quantcast of my GEO .TVs
http://www.quantcast.com/p-fbWv4nOxnFXlw/traffic/sites

Despite challenges, there is an ability to get traffic to .TV domains if you do the blocking and tackling. This is all organic traffic. No SEM.

Cheers George.
I really hope the Google issue does get sorted for you as i know it will affect your plans.
Glad 1,2 people really got what i was trying to say. :D

 

[soggyindo]

I split the thread as users were using 'Google hates .tv' in multiple threads and blaming Google on everything. With commesnts in appraisal threads like "How will you get traffic when Google hates .tv's"

The other thread is great, great tpic with some wonderful arguements but others who maybe dont have the same experience are using that thread to explain any & every problem their .tv domains/sites have.
The last thing we need is ANOTHER subject for multiple users whoa re down on .tv right now to repeat in many unrelated threads. All IMHO

well, i'm not sure, is this supposed to be a "positive" thread about google and .tv? i can't see the point of that?

i haven't heard so much people blaming google. we've all taken a punt that we can "turn" a ccTLD into a gTLD - and google hasn't played along yet. and now we're trying to deal with the situation yes?

 

[mckennaronnie]

well, i'm not sure, is this supposed to be a "positive" thread about google and .tv? i can't see the point of that?

i haven't heard so much people blaming google. we've all taken a punt that we can "turn" a ccTLD into a gTLD - and google hasn't played along yet. and now we're trying to deal with the situation yes?

You read it all wrong (maybe i'm to blame)

This thread is NOT positive about Google , i never said that.

The thread is to say "Before you blame all your traffic problems on Google then do the basics to get traffic"

As for the past few weeks users have been picking up on 2,3 negatives and posting them everywhere. In many occassions that i have seen then the reasons these users cant get traffic has very little to do with google, it 99% to them not doing the basics.

The 'People Blaming Google' was not those who contributed greatly to the 'Google and Tv' debate, it was other users who are delighted to of found a new problem to bang on about in multiple threads so i thought i'd try stop it before it came as bad as the 'What If....."

:zzz:

 

[soggyindo]

The thread is to say "Before you blame all your traffic problems on Google then do the basics to get traffic"
:zzz:

ok, cool. balance is good - let's not blame every problem on the extension.

let's focus on good SEO, but also the fact that our great .tv's are performing badly in comparison with our so-so .coms.

 

[hullswingerscom]

i do try to be Positive about dot tv
i did try to develop and not just park the thing...
but i can see yahoo is ok but not google,its not rocket science
this has to effect the value of dot tv if we like it or not.
my last word on this because it needs someone with more knowledge then me.

stupid domain name anyway!

 

[mckennaronnie]

i do try to be Positive about dot tv
i did try to develop and not just park the thing...
but i can see yahoo is ok but not google,its not rocket science
this has to effect the value of dot tv if we like it or not.
my last word on this because it needs someone with more knowledge then me.

stupid domain name anyway!

I agree with all you say there Hull's

ok, cool. balance is good.

let's focus on good SEO, but also the fact our great .tv's are performing badly in comparison with out so-so .coms.

Agreed

 

[buyauthority]

Actually the best advertising is word of mouth. Use social network and give your members something to always come back to and you'll see more than enough traffic or simply piggy back of squidoo, hubpages, etc. Do bookmarking.

Great content and value equals traffic. No need Google.

 

[soggyindo]

Actually the best advertising is word of mouth. Use social network and give your members something to always come back to and you'll see more than enough traffic or simply piggy back of squidoo, hubpages, etc. Do bookmarking.

Great content and value equals traffic. No need Google.

hear hear, well pointed out.

i have uber competitive keyword names in .org, .info and .me that i don't have a hope in hell of using google for. but a memorable name and a few diggs and you're sorted.

 

[localexperts]

I would like to make one comment on .COM parking and direct navigation

I have some very good .COM domains. I get very little type in traffic on my .COM domains.

A little story, I had a .COM I left drop because it gets no traffic. A well know domainer picked it up and is trying to sell it. I'm on their email distribution list. The domainer is reporting that the sites makes $XX a week in click revenue. I'm highly skeptical b/c it did like 2-3 uniques a month for me.

I don't trust alot of these stats. I don't trust many .COM stats I see thrown around.

I've also witness one .TV owner throw out the stats for their site. Their daily uniques that they quoted exceed the daily stats for my site AllWedding (dt) com. Yet, in Quantcast and Compete.com, you can see AllWedding's traffic and it reports minimal traffic for their domains.

If they are truely doing that amount of traffic, they would not be working a full time job because they could generate $XXX,XXX in revenue with ease.

I'm very skeptical on alot of these traffic claims for direct navigation.

I believe ALOT of it is due to SEO because the keyword is tied to a high search term and it has gotten decent placement in Google. Lets face it Nashville.com gets decent traffic, but it has been around since 1998 and has good SEO. It is not all type in traffic, that is bunk.

With all my .COMs, the amount of type in I get on everything from LosAngelesWedding.com to BanquetFacilities.com to PortraitPhotographers.com to FitnessTrainers.net to DetroitLandscaper.com to BathContractors.com is about in the same ballpark as the .TVs

That is why Google/SEO is so important to .TV. I'm convinced if we can solve this problem - developed .TV sites will get as much traffic as a developed .COM.

No need Google.

I disagee. Harder to build a business without google than with google

 

[TheBulldog]

I do NOT blame google for not getting traffic.


I blame hulls. It's all his fault and he knows it. Fess up hulls, you've been messing with the Google algorithms haven't you?

 

[localexperts]

Well he is a swinger. he probably likes to sample of variety of sites.

BTW, I also buy into the fact that .TV sites tend to be new sites and maybe that new sites tied to recent regs don't rank well. That might be the issue with .TV domains.

While not a direct bias, it is still an issue that indirectly impacts .TV domains.

 

[cityforums.com]

Well he is a swinger. he probably likes to sample of variety of sites.

BTW, I also buy into the fact that .TV sites tend to be new sites and maybe that new sites tied to recent regs don't rank well. That might be the issue with .TV domains.

While not a direct bias, it is still an issue that indirectly impacts .TV domains.

George ... Google or no Google, good seo or no seo ...

in my opinion the city.Tvs need an organisation like Associated Cities

more than the city.coms need one ... until one is formed and has

a UNIFIED mindset the tv geos will never reach their full

potential. If such a thing happens all will do extremely well.

 

[localexperts]

until one is formed and has

a UNIFIED mindset.

You are right.

The question is what does a unified mindset entail? If it means the same platform, I think that will be tough. If it means cross linking, then that is pretty easy.

 

[cityforums.com]

You are right.



The question is what does a unified mindset entail? If it means the same platform, I think that will be tough. If it means cross linking, then that is pretty easy.

Each city and city owner is unique so should be the site ... although

it has to share a common minimum excellence for the visitors and users ...

there are ALOT of things that a group of motivated people can do together

that could not be accomplished alone or secluded as a single city or 12. It

could be global advertising purchases, shared programming costs, shared

platforms in the numerous sectors that a local site can market to, shared

best practices (internet success involves lots of ENDLESS testing as you

are aware), shared suppliers to reduce costs the list is endless ... the most

important of all is shared knowledge of what works and what doesn't

reducing the learning curve and error factor in all the spheres ... in

my opinion to have a super successful city.tv (earning millions per

year) it can be done alone, but it would be like trying to to build a bridge

alone. It would be far faster, and much less of a headache done with a

master mind group.

 

[localexperts]

I've stated that I think Niko Younts is the only one (currently) with enough clout to pull this off. Niko now works for Ben at Global.TV. Ben has every major Canadian GEO TV. Niko is also the only one who speaks to every GEO TV owner and who has the relationship to bridge past issues.

Could someone else, pull it off - possible, as long as they have business sense.

I would have no problem linking to other GEO TV owners - especially now that I don't have to worry about being classified as a link farm

I would have no problem, with a sales force from the association selling ads on our GEO TVs and we take a cut for syndication.

As long as I can run Pay Per Lead and the Local Experts tools on my GEO TVs, I'm fine with anything that will help get more traffic to the GEO TVs.

One thing to remember, Kuba and myself have other business interests that demand our focus. So while most GEO .TV owners spend 100% of their time doing GEO .TV, any group would have to account for owners who can only dedicate a portion of their time to this initiative.

 

[cityforums.com]

I've stated that I think Niko Younts is the only one (currently) with enough clout to pull this off. Niko now works for Ben at Global.TV. Ben has every major Canadian GEO TV. Niko is also the only one who speaks to every GEO TV owner and who has the relationship to bridge past issues.

Could someone else, pull it off - possible, as long as they have business sense.

I would have no problem linking to other GEO TV owners - especially now that I don't have to worry about being classified as a link farm

I would have no problem, with a sales force from the association selling ads on our GEO TVs and we take a cut for syndication.

As long as I can run Pay Per Lead and the Local Experts tools on my GEO TVs, I'm fine with anything that will help get more traffic to the GEO TVs.

Each site owners should be allowed to do what they wish to maximize their

earnings while respecting a minimal common excellence ... seems like

like the global.tv conference is more .tv focused than geo or city.tv ...

(To compare, I'm not sure what a conference of .com owners would

accomplish) ... Being pragmatic, the city.com owners are years in internet

time ahead of the game and could only get stronger which makes it more

difficult for any competition. From a domaining point of view ... sure you can

sell the geos and earn an ok or excellent roi ... developing the city.tv properly

however is priceless.