.tv TV.com Vs .tv

[equity78]

In this corner weighing in at 800 LBS the UNDISPUTED HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION OF THE WORLD .com and in this corner an upstart on the come .tv

TV.com VS .tv

 

[michaeldotcom]

Just because there was not a "recent" high sales volume of TV.com does not detract from its value. You have to take many factors into account including PAST sales to determine the value Now. If I tried to value all of my domains based only on recent sales my domains may as well be worthless.
Namebio does not archive every sale of wither .TV or TV.com. I know of a multi million TV.com deal a few years ago. To my knowledge there are no multi-million dollar .tv sales. Why not include all sales from 2008, were you trying to exclude the $80,000 soccertv.com sale?

Be sure that I'm not trying to exclude any sales at all. I'm just trying to have a honest look at the current market.

I would never say that tv.com domains don't have any value and I find it's great that there have indeed been some great tv.com sales. The better the market for videocentric domains is, the better it is for .tv

I agree that Namebio doesn't archive every domain sale and we all know that many many domain sales are kept private, including many big ones. This definitely makes it more difficult to get the bigger picture.

We can only analyze things with the data we have. There may have been some multi-million sales of .tv or tv.com sales recently which we may not be aware of, but that's impossible to study.

What I can say is that over the past few months things have swung in favour of .tv in the aftermarket and that we're seeing more and more .tv sales and that these sales have been higher and higher in value. Nowadays reported $x,xxx .tv sales are very common while they weren't 2 or 3 years ago.

Why not include all sales from 2008

No problem if you want to include all sales from 2008.

Namebio lists only 20 tv.com domain sales in 2008, while it lists 154 .tv domain sales in 2008.
While it's true that soccertv.com was a very nice sale, there have been many more big .tv sales in 2008 than tv.com ones.

 

[TheBulldog]

Point to Michael.

Counterpoint pending.

 

[smashfactory]

all i personally know is i have sold way more .tv's- and get way more inquiries and offers on my .tv's than my tv.coms over the past year- and i own quite a few of both-

i believe they will both work in their individual ways

 

[michaeldotcom]

I believe they will both work in their individual ways

I definitely think that .tv is much more natural and more brandable than tv.com

I mean, if you look back to old extensions like .com, .net, .co.uk, etc. their websites have always been generic.com or geo.com or brandable.com (for example, business.com, london.com, google.com).

I don't see why it should be different with .tv, as it looks much clearer, shorter and more natural. I mean it wouldn't look right to have googlecom.com, and I've never thought that tv.com domains look really brandable.

Now it can be good to have tv.com if you own/develop a .tv domain, just to avoid losing traffic, just like it can be good to also have the hyphenated version or the plural version or whatever.

But I personally wouldn't develop a tv.com domain and the only tv.com domains that I own are the ones where I own the .tv

 

[smashfactory]

soccertv.com included a site, traffic- it was not just for the domain name-

i personally agree- i like to "see" a .tv name over a tv.com name- just seems more streamlined- but as a seller, i need to have a little bit of everything because there will always be those who want videocentric, but will not buy anything but .com-

 

[michaeldotcom]

i personally agree- i like to "see" a .tv name over a tv.com name- just seems more streamlined- but as a seller, i need to have a little bit of everything because there will always be those who want videocentric, but will not buy anything but .com-

You're definitely doing the right thing as a seller because there's indeed in the market a lot of people who won't buy anything but .com.

However, I personally tend to think that .com is overrated (even though i must admit that most of my portfolio is .com).

I would tend to think that on the long term, the importance of .com will decrease relatively as other meaningful extensions will keep growing rapidly. By meaningful, I mean extensions like .tv, .org, .info, .net, .co.uk, etc.

In my opinion, it does make much more sense for a website to have an excellent brandable and memorable name with a good alternative extension rather than a crappy long .com

For example, I would think that spain.info (very successful website) is a much better name than spanishtouristguideonline.com.
Or that boston.tv (very good website too) is a much better name than thebostontvchannel.com

It's a fact that an extension like .tv is more recent than .com, that fewer websites are developed on it now, but that is progressively changing and I would definitely think that users will get much more used to .tv, .info, etc. in a few years time than they already are now.

Dotcom kings with very valuable .com portfolios are scared of the rise of other extensions and are trying to belittle them.

But as the global demand for good domain names keeps rising and the good .com domains keep getting rarer, more expensive and often completely out of reach, the demand for good names in meaningful extensions like .tv will definitely grow rapidly.

 

[localexperts]

The only reason I would buy a TV.com is to protect a .TV I already own.

One person's viewpoint.

 

[StargateCapital]

all i personally know is i have sold way more .tv's- and get way more inquiries and offers on my .tv's than my tv.coms over the past year- and i own quite a few of both...

Same here -- I've received more inquiries on .tvs and more solid offers on them than most names in my .com portfolio. I only have 400 .tv vs 3500+ .coms. Offers come in usually *starting* at $1,000 from serious buyers for .tv's whereas the .com offers are mostly ridiculous in the $60 to $250 range from window shoppers. As far as tv.com goes, it is, IMHO, a defensive reg tactic only. I believe it does not really have that much value, both looking at previous sales history and from personal experience. You can throw whatever suffix you want and find tons of "hidden gems" for .com. For example, web.com, network.com, [enter keyword here].com, etc. Those types of names are second rate to a solid generic IMHO. Spend your money wisely folks.

Best Regards,

RL

 

[domainacrobat]

Same here -- I've received more inquiries on .tvs and more solid offers on them than most names in my .com portfolio. I only have 400 .tv vs 3500+ .coms. Offers come in usually *starting* at $1,000 from serious buyers for .tv's whereas the .com offers are mostly ridiculous in the $60 to $250 range from window shoppers. As far as tv.com goes, it is, IMHO, a defensive reg tactic only. I believe it does not really have that much value, both looking at previous sales history and from personal experience. You can throw whatever suffix you want and find tons of "hidden gems" for .com. For example, web.com, network.com, [enter keyword here].com, etc. Those types of names are second rate to a solid generic IMHO. Spend your money wisely folks.

Best Regards,

RL

Offers come in usually *starting* at $1,000 from serious

LOL have you looked at your .TV domains lately! The reason you get alot of offers on .TV usually starting at $1000, is becuase your names are really really really really good!

I would be embarrased if I offered less than a $1000 for many of your names.

 

[jeffoverman]

Roy surly owns some top notch names. He is probably top 5 here. Johntv, Richard, Sanchay, mr rhee, and couple others own some gems.

Wish I knew of .tv 4 years ago lol. Oh well.

J

I offer a 1,000 bucks for sneakers.com lol

 

[hullswingerscom]

had some offers on my tvkeywords.com this week ,
check out www.tvbrighton.com maybe this started a trend not mine.

good site showing tv in uk hottin up

http://www.absolutebrighton.tv/

my team hull city got to wembley for the premiership playoffs how cool is that