.tv Which type of Geo convention would you rather own?

[DomainAgency.com]

Lets use Chicago as an example city.

Personally with exception of the obvious Chicago.com which as we all agree is head and shoulders better then everything else.

So now we are playing for second place.

I would take Chicago.TV over ANY other of these:

Chicagotv.com
Chicago.net
Chicago.org
Chicago.info
Chicago.us
Chicago.mobi

I'm interested in knowing other people's opinions on this?

Thanks!

 

[htmlindex]

Currently, I would say Chicago.net is worth more than Chicago.tv

 

[Argos]

-For my portfolio & reselling purposes I would own
1) Chicago.net
2) Chicago.us
3) Chicago.info
-For development I would go for Chicago.tv. Great name.

.tv, what else ?

 

[mckennaronnie]

I'm no expert on US Geo's but heres my view judging on what i have read:

1: Chicago.net
2:Chicago.tv
3: Chicagotv.com

Chicago.net has more value right now, it is common to see City name .net's developed to a high standard. The other advantage with .net over .tv is the renewal fee, i dont know Chicago.tv's renewal but i would guess its premium of maybe $1k or so where .net is what $10 per year??

In 2,3 year or so then i would imagine a large % of top US Geo .tv's are developed and have become massive money makes and media favourites and this will push .tv up above .net.

Conclusion: For quick flip then .net but for longterm then .tv (i hope)

 

[StargateCapital]

2nd place clearly .net - then .tv IMHO

S

 

[simplyg123]

surprised at the lack of .com picks, the way i see it if it has to say tv at the end, might as well be a .tv

 

[DomainAgency.com]

2nd place clearly .net - then .tv IMHO

But Roy would say as far as longterm development potential .TV is second?

Look at sites like:

Boston.tv
Montreal.tv
HamptonRoads.tv (which also uses .com but .tv for Video)
Tulsa.tv
Parkcity.tv
Macon.tv
AtlanticCity.tv

I feel strongly that .TV generic city names will be seen by both the public and many strategic partners as "The official online Broadcast Channel for your city" and we are seeing clear evidence of that.

Macon.tv is owned and run by an ABC affiliate directly.

Boston.tv now has a deal with Boston.com (owned by the Boston Globe) to show there videos and is even on a drop down menu on the site if you search for "Boston TV"

Show me these examples in .net???

With the obvious tie in to media .TV will blow .net away hands down IMHO and the proof is already out there and getting stronger by the days and weeks.

 

[TheBulldog]

In order of current value.


Chicago.net
Chicagotv.com
Chicago.org
Chicago.tv
Chicago.info
Chicago.us
Chicago.mobi

The problem as I see it is that the market for tv's, even strong ones like this simply isn't as valuable as the ones above it.

From a development perspective it would be great, but value alone puts it lower. Likely at this point that it should be lowest on the list, but I just couldn't say that.

 

[StargateCapital]

But Roy would say as far as longterm development potential .TV is second?

Look at sites like:

Boston.tv
Montreal.tv
HamptonRoads.tv (which also uses .com but .tv for Video)
Tulsa.tv
Parkcity.tv
Macon.tv
AtlanticCity.tv

I feel strongly that .TV generic city names will be seen by both the public and many strategic partners as "The official online Broadcast Channel for your city" and we are seeing clear evidence of that.

Macon.tv is owned and run by an ABC affiliate directly.

Boston.tv now has a deal with Boston.com (owned by the Boston Globe) to show there videos and is even on a drop down menu on the site if you search for "Boston TV"

Show me these examples in .net???

With the obvious tie in to media .TV will blow .net away hands down IMHO and the proof is already out there and getting stronger by the days and weeks.

took me 2 seconds randomly typing in city .net urls..

http://seattle.net/
http://www.lasvegas.net/
http://miami.net/

as you already know I like the .tv extension, but right now IMHO its after .NET. as far as development goes, if boston.whattheheckever puts more stuff on the site and is better then other extensions, the people will find it eventually. .tv just sounds cool, is universally understood and goes with the online video blast/frenzy. would i like to see .tv push over to second, of course.

edit -- i see.. you're saying sites backed by ABC or whoever vs, just being developed on a particular extension.. ok that looks good.

S

 

[DomainAgency.com]

took me 2 seconds randomly typing in city .net urls..

http://seattle.net/
http://www.lasvegas.net/
http://miami.net/

Roy, respectfully, you missed my point. Show me tie in to major established media companies in the above example, thats what I'm asking for and thats where the money flows. In the few examples I gave above we have one with ABC and one with The New York Times Company.

 

[StargateCapital]

I got it ... eventually -- I'd be curious to see if there are any .nets with this type of backing.

S

 

[DomainAgency.com]

In the few examples I gave above we have one with ABC and one with The New York Times Company.

Not to mention Landmark Communications, owner of The Weather Channel, CBS affiliates in Nashville and Las Vegas, weather.com, weather.tv and many other properties. As has been well documented on this site, they own HamptonRoads.tv and numerous other generic .tv cities. They were not even satisfied with hamptonraods.com alone and felt they needed hamptonroads.tv This is a major sign when a billion dollar company feels this way.

My point, for a quick flip maybe .net but in a few years I guarantee chicago.tv is way more valuable the chicago.net and you are seeing in the early stages why this will be the case and that is why I am pointing it out.

So If someone offered you either one to take .net or .tv it should be a no brainer to take .tv unless you need to free up cash in the next 12 months then MAYBE .net

 

[MicroGuy]

I would rather own chicago.net because it's the most valuable. I really like chicago.tv, but the two domains don't compare in terms of market price. IMO

 

[simplyg123]

guess it also depends on the content it would have. If the plan was to make it a site full of videos and broadcasts, then .tv is the best option. But If it is more of an informational site or something not media related, than i would suggest . org, .net or .info. anything but .tv

 

[MillersCrossing]

over the next five years....tv.com, around that time watch all the tv.coms go after the .tv