My Take on .TV (& Other TLD) |

My Take on .TV (& Other TLD)


A discussion about the Geo Domain Expo turned into a lively discussion/debate about the merits of the .TV extension and developing .TV domain names. As most people know, I don’t care to own alternate extensions for a variety of reasons, with the most important being that consumers aren’t really aware of these alternate extensions. If I am going to buy a domain name for development, it will almost always be .com since they tend to get the type-ins, search engines seem to like them better, and when consumers tell a friend about the site, chances are good they will assume it’s .com. After some back and forth in the thread, someone made the comment:

“Since you own the .com, why bother with the .tv??? You are right…I understand you are developing, so I registered today which will make a great video site of wine conneseurs [sp] talking about their passion for wine, grapes and wine making in general………….it will also include vine growing tips, videos of famous vineyards across the globe, where you will be able to book online tours of these establishments………
But hey no worries right??…No need to secure the .tv that means absolutely nothing to nobody”

Developing a website on any alternative TLD is probably the only way to make money (other than flipping it to another domain investor). I think it is much more difficult to rank well in the search engines with a non .com site – especially if the .com is developed. From my perspective, Google and Yahoo give more credence to .com names, so it probably takes less effort to rank well with the .com than it would to rank with a .TV or .Whatever. This will make it more challenging to make money, as it is far less likely that a consumer will type in .TV for a domain name than a .com, even if they are looking for video.

The real money from development comes from direct to business advertising sales. In fact, when I developed, one of the people I spoke with about a free advertisement with a link back told me she wanted to buy my featured breeder section for 6 categories. She told me I had a great domain name and a great looking website, so it wasn’t a tough sale. I am sure it would be difficult to get less than Internet-savvy businesses to advertise on a non .com TLD because many people only know .com, .net, .org and .gov.

Without strong search engine rankings, driving traffic to a website is a more difficult job. It’s hard enough to get links to an established site, and I would think it would be made more difficult with a non-traditional TLD. Some words and phrases are so difficult to spell that type-in traffic is virtually non-existent. This is the case with, and it’s the reason I am developing it – (that and I drink quite a bit of wine!) I am going to need to rely on links and search engine optimization for my traffic.

Incidentally, I checked out the Whois information for the .TV name, and the owner has a Flatbush Brooklyn address, so I thought I would make a more poignant illustration. From a real estate point of view, owning is like owning an apartment in Brooklyn, while owning is like owning an apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Sure Flatbush might be a nice place to live, but it will be more difficult convincing your friends to take the 2 or Q train to Brooklyn on a Saturday night than it will to get them to visit Manhattan. You can arguably have a great time in both places, but what fun is it if your friends aren’t enjoying the fun with you?

The bottom line is that I believe .Whatever have value if you develop them. Consumers for the most part aren’t aware of them, so the more that aren’t developed mean it will be tougher teaching consumers that they exist. I would think it is tougher to drive traffic to a non .com than a .com – especially if the .com is developed, so you need to determine if it’s worth the extra time and effort to develop a non .com TLD rather than trying to buy the .com.

I think the most vociferous supporters of non .com TLD are those who own them, clearly trying to make them relevant (and create liquid value).  If you need cash quickly, it’s obviously MUCH easier selling a .com domain name than a TLD domain name. If few people care (or know) about a TLD, it’s much more difficult to sell them.  It’s always amusing to see forum posts and blog posts of the most ardent .Whatever supporters who have a full page dedicated to selling these TLD.  Makes you go hmmm…

About The Author: Elliot Silver is an Internet entrepreneur and publisher of Elliot is also the founder and President of Top Notch Domains, LLC, a company that has sold seven figures worth of domain names in the last five years. Please read the Terms of Use page for additional information about the publisher, website comment policy, disclosures, and conflicts of interest.

Reach out to Elliot: Twitter | | Facebook | Email

Comments (30)


    Sounds to me that the person who sent you that message obviously was trying to be clever, but if he/she thinks they will actually spend the money/time to develop that site and have it try to compete with, they are crazy. I guess they are unaware that you can feature videos on your website…

    I can see the advertising campaign right now–“Just like…but DOT tv!” What a waste of reg fees, trying to make a point. I predict that will be dropped in a year or two, after they make an attempt to sell it to you…

    July 20th, 2008 at 8:08 pm

    Tony Lam, DMD

    Looks like you guys are not buying into the DotTV hype being drummed up by Owen Frager.


    I consider Owen a friend and respect his great marketing mind tremendously. I don’t know if I would call it hype, but I wouldn’t spend the time developing a .TV name – even if I could purchase it for the registration fee.

    July 20th, 2008 at 8:34 pm

    James Barclay

    My response on Namepros

    Thats a very long response about a comment to Elliot about an extension he says he does not care or believe in…………….

    To me it looks like it hit a sore point!!!

    I was the one that regged the .tv version………now if the .tv means absolutely nothing to Elliot, why the huge response??!!!!!

    You are right about one thing though, it is way down my list of development priorities, probably towards the non existent….but my point was made – a site dedicated to wine lovers screams out for a .tv ext and I have sold for a healthy ROI having bought it for reg fee……and i am prepared to have a bet with Elliot that I do sell the name to someone who cares about wine and winemaking and wine sipping within two years etc etc = not my cup of tea though……

    One thing I won’t be doing is trying to sell the name back to you – not my style…..but who knows i am betting as .TV gets more and more widespread attention, you may well come to me and I will give it to you for free!! As long as you admit it on your blog…..(hmmmm doubtful – although look at Frager and his 360….)

    To sum it up, if you are developing the .com and it makes sense as a .TV aswell. for goodness sake buy the .tv too………for 15 bucks you are protecting yourself from a rival who will own the generic – I dont care what your theories are about search engine recognition

    Now just to help you understand completely, if you had a site called, I would not recommmend that anyone reg as it would have no use as a channel………….so I am only talking about names that make sense in the .tv ext


    I caught your comment on Steve’s blog and had some free time on the ride back home from the shore to write up a blog post. It’s not sore point for me, but as someone who has done reasonably well ( :-) )in the domain business, I thought it would be a good idea to let people know how I feel in a public area since I don’t spend much time on forums anymore. I get quite a bit of email from people asking what I think of .mobi, .me, .in, .tv…etc, and since I dedicate most of my time to .com, I thought I would give my opinion.

    If someone wants to spend thousands of dollars branding (on top of paying $500 for year 1 and who knows for subsequent years), more power to them. I will happily take all the accidental traffic. There are enough opportunities out there in .com that other extensions aren’t on my radar screen. If I bought every single TLD extension for my premium domain names, it would cost me tens of thousands of dollars.

    What’s the difference between and when neither gets type in traffic? Should I spend $10-40/each to buy all TLD when I am just building a mini site? Should I spend $500/year on as a premium name? I will happily let someone build a site on there. I think that will drive traffic to my site.

    July 20th, 2008 at 9:22 pm

    George Pickering

    I have advertisers who call requesting to advertise on our DOT TV domains same as our DOT NET and DOT COM domains. It is not about the extension, it is about how many eyeballs you have on the site. While I agree, there are some advertisers who will waste money advertising on a DOT COM that gets no traffic – because they are uneducated advertisers.

    If a site has traffic, it will attract advertisers no matter if it is a DOT COM, DOT TV, DOT NET, OR DOT whatever.

    All that counts is number of visitors who will buy from my business, not the extension.



    What % of your traffic to comes from type ins and natural search results, and what % is from the paid search advertising you are doing on Google?

    July 20th, 2008 at 9:59 pm


    Do you really have enough time on your hands to be wasting all of ours? You’re jealous, spiteful and immature. Obviously your business acumen and behavior is right smack in the middle of high school. If you want to develop every multimillion dollar .TV concept, go for it. I am sure the veterans of the industry are going to be right behind you.

    July 20th, 2008 at 10:03 pm

    owen frager

    Let me be clear. I am not party to any extension debates or not favoring any extension over the other. I am merely reporting discoveries of big media companies investing billions into extending the possibilities of what could be offered to local advertisers before. Everyone would rather have a Supe rBowl commercial then a directory listing because what I am an advocate of through years of proven success is “nothing SELLS like the POWER of VIDEO” and that selling power could just as easily be seized on dotCOM as on TV.

    as an example, the most successful model on the web has been and still is porn and that’s due to VIDEO and subscription versus PPC models.

    I’ve been writing about this for years arguing that the ability to produce video content and someone like E.W. Scripps and Gannet owning a network of assets and relationships in various markets… maps well to deliver ROI to Hollywood-savvy dotTV investors working from a strategy with specific prospects, needs and opportunities in mind. It’s a different league and not saying anyone should go out and buy dotTV to be successful. Nor is it saying Elliot or David need companion dotTV geos to thrive.

    In fact, what got my attention is Demand Media’s attraction to Yahoo for a billion dollars or more and my example of a woman making Challah bread on a Demand property and getting 700K views while major brands advertise tagged on the screen and aside of it. This is happening on and all of their prime Video properties are dotCOM properties (which I’ve pointed out the irony before):

    What’s interesting is that no one is typing in any domain to discover these local experts. Like the firsthand experience I’ve developed from having created 4000 search optimized pages of blog content… they come from viral marketing, social networks and Google searches to pages within sites.

    One example on my blog posts is of the Demand Media Pluck acquisition. The information comes from the LA Times and is hardly “Frager Hype.” It talks about how adding social networking platforms to brand sites like Dallas Cowboys and The Ecomonist.

    Specifically said the article: “Demand Media combines the draw of specialized, semiprofessional content with the well-documented “stickiness” of social networking sites — the tendency of people to hang around when there is a community of like-minded individuals. Low-cost tools that enable users to comment, rank stories and find other users help keep them there.

    Simply by allowing reader comments and other interaction, such sites have seen their numbers of page views soar.

    It turns out that social networking also works in unlikely places. Scotts Co., the maker of lawn fertilizer, was getting 50,000 visitors a month in January before Pluck went to work letting people post pictures of their lawns, ask questions and give advice on weed fighting. In April, Scotts’ site got 450,000 visitors, according to Compete Inc.

    At a more basic level, the 470-employee company is mastering the new Google economy. In the same way that EBay Inc. turned homebound merchants into millionaire “power sellers,” Google can assemble niche audiences and bring them to previously undiscoverable destinations, which the search kingpin’s advertising programs then can make profitable.”

    The key is not the domain or extension but the new Google economy which is trumping the type-in economy of times past. It calls for new ideas and different thinking- not running out and duplicating your work on multiple extensions.

    We’ve reached the phase on the web where strategy and customer centricity wins the prize. The need for Web sites to create a sense of identity, or belonging, is the REAL challenge facing every business. There is an incredible opportunity to innovate.

    In a world of look-alike, work-alike and are-alike Web sites, success has far less to do with being better than being different. Which means that on the World Wide Web, as in any competitive market, a different idea (not a different extension) is worth the difference between failure and success.

    Hope this clears my position up.

    July 20th, 2008 at 10:19 pm



    …random *PAGE 1* search results–research.

    SEARCH: Travel Videos

    “2” dot tv domains on the first page.

    SEARCH: Travel Video

    TravelVideo.TV is # 1…

    SEARCH: Video Travel

    TravelVideo.TV is # 1…and BrightCove.TV appears as well.

    SEARCH: TravelVideo (no space)

    TravelVideo.TV is # 1, and # 2.

    SEARCH: Boston TV

    Boston.TV is # 1…and more importantly IN FRONT OF EVER SINGLE NEWS BROADCAST STATION, NEWSPAPER and MEDIA company in BOSTON.

    SEARCH: BostonTV (no space)

    Boston.TV and BrightCove.TV appear…again, IN FRONT of the broadcast stations.

    SEARCH: Montreal TV

    Montreal.TV is # 1…and more importantly, IN FRONT OF EVER SINGLE NEWS BROADCAST STATION, NEWSPAPER and MEDIA company in MONTREAL.

    SEARCH: Politics TV

    Museum.TV is # 2…and more importantly, (LinTV) has (2) listings…with NewMexicoPolictics.TV and RIPolitics.TV.

    SEARCH: Atlantic City TV

    AtlanticCity.TV is # 2…and more importantly, IN FRONT OF EVER SINGLE NEWS BROADCAST STATION, NEWSPAPER and MEDIA company in AC.

    SEARCH: Korea Videos

    VBS.TV is on page # 1…

    SEARCH: Live Streaming (same results–LIVE STREAM)

    USTREAM.TV is # 2…and Justin.TV is # 3

    SEARCH: Live TV

    Justin.TV appears on page # 1…

    SEARCH: New York Sports

    NYS.TV is # 4 on page # 1…

    SEARCH: Travel TV

    TravelVideo.TV and OpenRoad.TV both appear on page # 1…

    SEARCH: Hollywood TV

    Hollywood.TV appears several times on page # 1…

    SEARCH: Nebraska TV

    Nebraska.TV is # 1…


    While that’s all good, those terms aren’t searched very often according to Aaron Wall’s keyword tool. People search more for Hollywood, Nebraska, Atlantic City…etc.

    July 20th, 2008 at 10:49 pm

    owen frager

    One other thing speaking of wine. The most successful wine site out there is a guy from Jersey video blogging from his dinner table over a glass of wine. He has both TV and dotCOm extensions but it doesn’t matter because the one-and-only Gary Vaynerchuk, host of the amazing video blog Wine Library TV (WLTV) — affectionately known as The Thunder Show. This “Jersey guy” epitomizes the power of the people on the Internet.

    Gary has turned a video blog into a $50 million industry by bringing wine tasting to the masses. Hand-held camera. Set reminiscent of Wayne’s World. And a wine palette that can rival the world’s masters any day of the week.

    In “uncorking Your Brand with Social Media,” Gary will be a keynote speaker describing:
    * His from-the-ground-up approach to social media, personal branding and business building.
    * How he attracts more than 80,000 viewers a day to his video blog with Facebook, MySpace, Digg, Twitter, Pownce and other networking channels.
    * How you can use social media to increase your brand recognition online.

    Again, though posted on my blog and possibly misconstrued as hype, Gary will be speaking with Arianna Hffington at a major event– and this is an event I’d reccomend to build skills and contacts outside of a domain silo:

    I think there’s a lot more to the dotTV possibilities we are hearing about then just adapting the extension alone.

    It’s a combination of video, social networking, twitter and dotCOm sites with directories and local experts like you find at Farm.TV and RealMeals.TV are cases in point.

    July 20th, 2008 at 10:50 pm


    SEARCH: Moron TV
    http://WWW.TV.COM is NUMERO UNO #1, Got that?, .COM is #1.

    July 20th, 2008 at 10:59 pm



    You’re *still* missing the point buddy.

    What is happening “right now”, before everyone eyes, ON an INTERNATIONAL scale, has NEVER happened before. (.net, .info, .org, .biz, .ws, .name, etc).

    With technology advances, increase of broadband and video technology, and IPTV research/development…the pieces are falling together–and the “new age” of media is here. LIKE it-LOVE it-HATE it. YOU can NOT (intelligently) ignore it.

    The reality is, “domainers” in *many cases have kept driving the price/values of these .com domains up, up and up.

    I talk in close groups with MEDIA moguls, VP’s of Digital, and global investors, to seek their opinions and to exchange ideas and concepts,…NOT (PPC) domainers.

    Although the vast majority of the world missed the .com boat–a big one, the generations are passing, and TIMES are changing.

    You say, you hope someone would develop your DOT COM with a DOT TV? Are you serious…? (maybe crazy) You can’t be serious though.

    It’s about CONTENT, MARKETING, SALES and then TRAFFIC. While we can all agree SEO is very important–it is NOT everything. If a “Boston.TV” model entered your market–they would take 50% of your market; DAY # 1, period.

    Again, it’s not about the decade long sales pitch, “we’re “the” brand, with long lists of information and nice traffic”. In 2008 and beyond–it’s about (content, marketing, sales ability, traffic), hello, Mr. Advertiser, i’m sure you’ve seen “xxxxxxx.TV”, because this city has NEVER seen anything like it sir/mam. We’d like to host your company profile/interview/video AND add a directly text listing if you so chose. DOT COM domains will soon be FORCED to completely overhaul their sites, but the DOT TV “brand” and image is far to powerful to be ignored.

    The key factor that you (and others) are missing is that DOT TV is it’s own beast, and it’s FINALLY not about PPC, not even close. It’s FORCING development and content, COMPELLING, RICH-media, entertaining “CONTENT” wins the chips.

    Think about it. ANYONE can create an all-text based site with static ads. ANYONE. And more importantly anyone can buy ads and hire an SEO/SEM team, period. The DOT COM “wow” factor is officially evaporating–and with time, education and development, the DOT TV brand will surface more and more, with each passing day.

    *Print Media, Magazines, broadcast stations, Sports leagues, AND domain developers/investors are ALL trying to find the next…”big thing”, and yet somehow, the only group of the (5) that are missing the boat this time–are the “domainers”, how ironic.

    Companies like RealMeals.TV, TnT.TV, Cn8.TV, MissWorld.TV, TurnHere.TV, TurnHereTravel.TV, VBS.TV, uStream.TV, iReport.TV, Boston.TV, Farm.TV, HamptonRoads.TV, NHL.TV, MLB.TV, i-am.TV, Blip.TV, BrightCove.TV, HotNewz.TV are changing the GAME, with every passing day.

    It’s about the MEDIA RE-INVENTION. And although, *I clearly understand you too can put video on your .com sites, it’s much–much bigger than that Elliot. I *KNOW you’re not ever going to agree with me, (or my *FACTS*), but I still enjoy presenting them, for others to enjoy a *fresh and factual point of view, rather than a solo, personal opinion. You don’t have to agree, and I hold nothing against you, but I will openly say you’re views on this particular subject are simply “incorrect”, and my facts prove this statement.

    Ps: Your statement about “unsure DOT TV renewals, is a large (dot com) myth. AS LONG AS YOU RENEW your domain, they CAN NOT increase your annual renewal. I still think the fact people are desperately grasping onto the “holy renewal” pricing as a negative. Still very humorous IMO.



    Yes I get that it’s all about marketing…. etc. – the same argument made by owners of every other TLD. Since development and marketing are so important to making these extensions valuable which .TV sites have you developed? From my perspective, most owners of these types of extensions talk about marketing, branding…etc, but when it comes down to business, they haven’t developed their names.

    BTW, I have quite a bit of work to do today so I don’t think I will have much time to comment/moderate, so don’t get frustrated if comments aren’t approved immediately like usual.

    July 20th, 2008 at 11:34 pm


    It’s a fact that .com is number one and it will remain in that position for a very long time. I’m not an investor in the .TV extension but I do believe that any extension can be a success with strong “Development”, “Branding”. Those two things are what has given .com its trust with consumers to date.

    But I will add this, I have seen major development and branding with .TV over the past year or two. Almost everyday I see an ad spot in some medium for .TV that displays the extension. Of course I see a lot more .com advertisements. But online video is much more attainable today than in years past which has lent more relevance to .TV development.

    Those three things, “Branding”, “Development”, affordable “Cost” to developers and consumers are going to give .TV a spot in the top five TLDs over the next few years. Just search for the term “TV” on Google and you’ll be amazed at how many .TV domains there are in the first ten pages of results.

    But, page 1 is dominated by .com and that’s why I’m sticking with it for the foreseeable future.

    July 21st, 2008 at 12:58 am


    Hi Elliot,

    If you were going to build a local site about New York City, and you couldn’t afford NY NYC New York or New York City .com, what name or kind of name would you buy?


    I would find another topic to write about. I love living in Manhattan (even though I hate NY sports teams), but since I couldn’t afford to buy premium NY-related domain names, I don’t have any NY-related websites. I tried to buy but the price was higher than I valued it at, so I passed and opted to build sites on strong domain names.

    July 21st, 2008 at 6:53 am

    owen frager

    You’re not arguing about NY City here- it’s more like
    Guy 1: “The bridge is #1, I am taking the bridge”
    Guy 2: “No you are crazy take the tunnel- the tunnel is going to close your bridge”
    Guy 3: “I take the Ferry, you guys don’t know what you are missing”
    Donald Trump: “I work and live without having to do any of those things, but from my window I can watch you all wasting the two-three hours a day I get to be productive and beat your ass in business”

    There are many routes to your destination. It doesn’t matter what they are called.

    That’s the lesson of the iceman story I blogged this morning on this subject. Don’t rename your sites, but never lose touch with serving the needs of the customer.

    Whether by block ice or modern fridge, the customer wants to keep their food and fresh- so find the way to deliver that with the least cost and the most possible satisfaction.

    Apply that to and Good luck.

    July 21st, 2008 at 10:20 am

    Robert Haastrup-Timmi

    Well! I certainly plan on selling NewYorkApartment.TV to Donald Trump and for big bucks too! Anyone got his number? How about SwitzerlandRealestate.TV to UBS or Credit Suisse? hey Niko you’re right on buddy! I know its you chum!

    The point is, for those who still waffle at where .Tv is going and fail miserably to diversify, let me put it this way:

    If I hired a domainer dotTV naysayer as my VP Marketing Strategist of a NYSE listed company, I will expect you to spot “realistic” trends and advise the company accordingly.

    Is this not why Rick Schwartz beleived a lot of media professionals ought to be fired for ignoring the obvious? Well, its a great shame to see fellow domainers are failing to realize what is such a no brainer! Let us be very clear about this, doTTV like it or not is not just another parochial domain extension like .net, .org or .info and it is a gross mistake to even make the comparison. Fact is, .com now has an adversary and that is .TV. Again it is like print media came along first before the moving images of mr Loggi John Beard through the introduction of the TV idiot box, and the rest is history!

    Of course print media survived and indeed people always will read print, but it just so happens that human beings by natural cognitive design have a penchant to assimilate “VISUAL” images better. It’s another reason why the rennaissance period right through to the great impressionists of the 1800 were so idolized for communicating allegorical content through “IMAGES” called paintings.

    I remmember at Macromedia when we started out with Director and our CEO Bud Colligan realized very quickly the company needed to change direction when the internet became a medium for communication. He had great foresight and we launched Dreamweaver 1.0….that was just the beginning! Within the last 4 years only, we now have blogs, wikis, social networking, iphones, ipods and so on and particularly a whole new mind set has emerged called the “Facebook” and “Myspace” generation. This generation who are shaping the future of internet consupmtion really don’t give a damn about .com, but I can promise you one thing for sure, they all know what TV means and stands for whether they consume it on the PC or through their mobile phones.

    I bet an Amazonian with a mobile phone may just want to see if he could search for “TV” only because he heard of the acronym and understands what it clearly stands for, …and that my dear friends is the point! It really has nothing to do with direct navigation traffic, ppc etc… all those are just minor detail to the “Big Picture”

    Therefore, If you were my VP of Stategic Marketing and advised me wrongly….ur FIRED!!


    If I was your VP of Strategic Marketing, CFO, or CEO, you would be in a very strong domain and cash position right now. I think I’ve done okay for myself sticking to what I know and learning about what I don’t know. Shit… less than a year ago I had zero geo domain names. Today, I have 2 strong geographic domain names that are performing well. Every domain acquisition and sale is a risk. I mitigate my risk by investing smartly, and that is done by buying .com domain names that can be liquidated quickly if necessary. Cash is king, and if you can quickly turn your domain names into cash, you are in a great position.

    July 21st, 2008 at 11:52 am


    What are you going to do when the following appear?

    July 21st, 2008 at 11:58 am


    play the odds – go w/ dot com – most everything else is noise.

    July 21st, 2008 at 12:10 pm

    M. Menius

    This is always an interesting topic, but the way in which it is presented pushes polarization, i.e. dotcom is wise and everything else fool’s gold …, no? For me, it’s not really about arguing the same points. Maybe I’m tired of the disconnect that exists among domainers who seem to be always jockeying for imaginary position or status. Develop your names, share ideas, try to create something of value regardless of your extension. Years from now we’ll look back and see where everyone expanded their views anyway and achieved successes in a variety of different ways. Worth remembering … there are very few true experts but many, many wanna be’s.

    I will add this. Developing services/content for any name is hard work, but a fun challenge at the same time. It’s still interesting to examine other sites, break them down and analyze the design, layout, content, and monetization strategies at work. Every now and then I happen up on a site that really impresses me and fuels more research and learning. One new idea can lead to ten more. I love that feeling.

    July 21st, 2008 at 12:45 pm

    Brian Berke


    I would welcome the developments that you speak of one day (.video, .IPTV etc.) The minute that companies decide that they need a videocentric TLD on the web (as many are doing now, including ones that already own the .com) then .TV wins hands down and only goes up in value as the TLD of choice for this space.

    We are talking 2-3 years from now at best that any other videocentric TLD can hit the market

    1. You can not get better then the 2 letters that have meant watching video for decades “TV” any other alt, is a poor alternative as far as meaning.

    2. More importantly the adaption of .tv has a huge head start and now that technology is finally here it is exploding. Already numerous fortune 500 companies and billion dollar media companies have adapted the use of .TV and our branding it big time. You ain’t seen nothing yet compared to the branding dollars that will hit the market to promote .TV in the next 2 years.

    Therefore, any other videocentric TLD that may one day hit the market would only boost the value of the best generic and well used TLD for this space which is .TV. .Video would be to .TV as .biz is to .com. Sure some will use it, but the companies that want to play in the big leagues have already embraced .TV.

    Also, I am leaving a copy of a post I made to Elliot on that he has not responded to regarding the mistake people are doing but just lumping in .TV as simply another ccTLD:


    Yes I agree we can both go different directions and be successful.

    Here is the thing that cracks me up about lumping in .TV with all other ccTLD’s.

    .TV is a worldwide brand that means the same thing in every place on the globe and is being adopted worldwide. It is growing in Asia, Germany, South America, America ETC.

    Yes it started as a country code, yes there were premiums, yes there were early marketing mishaps, that’s what threw those people off the scent, but the technology needed to catch up with the extension and it finally has.

    The public that learns of it says “Cool, the have a new extension for TV on the Internet”, I have heard this many times. they do not know what a ccTLD is.

    IT IS A UNIQUE ANIMAL LIKE NO OTHER. It has provided a great alternative for media companies to get online with a powerful brand that means something.

    Elliot, I personally would never invest or develop in any other Geo TLD other then .com OR .TV. IMO is a poor replacement for, However, Burbank.TV developed is an innovative multi media sight that combines old world and new world media in a way that is revolutionary and makes sense by branding its online presence with “.TV”.

    Yes you can do this on a .com but guess what, you do not need the .com to do in an effective way that carries tremendous credibility in a community where major media companies will want to be involved. This is already being proven.

    That is why so many media companies that can afford to buy the .com if they wanted them are instead choosing to market the brand that has meant Video worldwide for decades “TV”.

    .TV is the real wild card out there and to simply lump it in “just another CCTLD” is a huge mistake IMO.

    Look at Hartnett’s track record. At least give the guy some credit.

    If you look at the landscape and where this going, you will see a TV is not a CCTLD, but a worldwide brand like no other.

    You also seem to think I am saying as a .com guy you need the .TV. Nothing can be further from the truth.

    But as a .TV guy who also do not need the .com and many have already showed this in a big way.

    Big media is attempting to partner and buy the .TV brand because “TV” ties to their existing business to the net in a way that makes sense for them and they can get can into this space much more affordable way then BRAND themselves.

    Skip Hoagland sees this potential. why because he is a savy and smart businessman with a media background. Skip said about .TV on in the infamous “Are Geo Domains Overrated Thread : “I agree these have value as well 100%. Yes we all know .com is King right now, but nothing last forever. Further if these along with every other variation like these .TV are managed and promoted properly anything is possible. These are especially good in the hands and ownership of local TV media since they have the ability to promote to a local audience to type them in for local info.”

    In effect Geo .TV is the ideal TLD, to be the cities online affiliate to the the web. That is what these guys in board rooms see and that is why we are seeing this happen.

    Elliot do not make the mistake of lumping .TV in with .mobi either. .mobi is a made up brand with no real world track record. It does not mean something to people who have no clue what it stands for. it does not have 50-60 years of real world branding behind it as TV does.


    Not responding on Steve’s blog wasn’t a slight – I just didn’t get around to it.

    July 21st, 2008 at 7:02 pm

    owen frager

    Listen to Robert. He sits on the Supreme Court (.com)

    July 21st, 2008 at 7:46 pm



    I guess it’s the ignorant and misinformed perspective of the three largest broadcast american television stations that they DO NOT embrace .TV. redirects to does nothing and is for sale. Why don’t you buy it and teach one of the largest Television Broadcast Networks that they are doing it all wrong.

    July 21st, 2008 at 8:56 pm


    We all agree that .tv = video, and that it is a worldwide term that is easily understood. It is a great extension for video content, but that is a liability as much as it is an asset.

    Is it a great extension for booking a hotel room? No.

    Is it a great extension for finding the price of a product? Not really.

    Is it a great extension to find out who hit the most home runs in the 1988 World Series? no.

    Is it a great extension to watch news and entertainment content related to the city of boston? yes.

    One thing a lot of people are missing in this argument is that text content is a lot easier to create, edit, put up, get indexed and sell advertising around. .TV may be a great extension for media companies who will have a focus on video content, but to build a long term business around video is a whole different animal – it is a lot more difficult. TV stations and production houses may build all sorts of cool sites on .tv, but at the end of the day it seems like they are just moving tv to the web – and I’m not competing with my local TV stations anyway.

    Someone brought up Boston earlier, so I’ll show the top searches related to the city of Boston. For how many of these will .TV be a logical choice? (one as far as I can tell)

    boston airport
    boston biography
    boston channel
    boston com
    boston globe
    boston hotel
    boston hotels
    boston ma
    boston marathon
    boston mass
    boston massachusetts
    boston pic
    boston restaurants
    boston weather
    city of boston
    flight to boston
    hotels in boston
    umass boston

    July 21st, 2008 at 11:24 pm


    “Is it a great extension for booking a hotel room? No.”

    Gordon, have you seen


    I actually dig this one. Solid domain name – even in .TV. It will take a lot of work filming to give what people want to see when they get their – videos of perspective hotels.

    July 21st, 2008 at 11:49 pm


    Yes, I’ve seen

    It is a standard hotel site, with a limited amount of video content about a limited number of hotels. And the videos themselves don’t show me much beyond what tripadvisor photos show. And (if they don’t already) tripadvisor will have user submitted hotel videos that will give me all I need.

    It doesn’t mean can’t be a good site, but in my opinion .tv isn’t a great extension to build a hotel booking site on.

    July 22nd, 2008 at 12:20 am



    Tripadvisor???? So I guess you have seen

    July 22nd, 2008 at 12:49 am


    Sorry folks.

    IMO. I have to disagree even with the

    I am not convinced that tv is globally accepted as a colloquial abbreviation for television. The US, yes. The UK, yes. But everywhere else. Not so much.

    Elliot I absolutely support you in your position that .tv is to be lumped with the other tlds.

    I honestly feel that others are simply attempting “blog propaganda”.

    This was fun though.

    July 22nd, 2008 at 12:54 am


    One thing about the internet is that it moves so fast that it is very hard to predict. I agree nothing will unseat dot com, however, the race for second place is on. People who dont think there is room for two major TLDs on the internet are totally naive.

    This industry is still quite young and it moves very, very fast . Anything can happen

    July 22nd, 2008 at 2:55 am



    I have never visited, and it doesn’t look like many other people have either:

    But that’s the thing – I don’t have a problem with .tv, and obviously video is getting bigger every day online. I think (which i will point out is an offshoot of a huge publishing company whose main site is .com) could be an awesome site, but it certainly isn’t where I’ll be initially going to book hotel rooms.

    July 22nd, 2008 at 9:33 am

    Ms Domainer

    When .tv first came out, my first reaction: “What a natural–this will be big.”

    Unfortunately, this hasn’t happened.

    The company that runs .tv got greedy and started holding back premium domains for “rent” at astronomical yearly fees. This, more than anything, is holding .tv back.

    As an end user, a company might pay a one-time premium of one million dollars for a premium .tv, but it’s not likely wanting to pay it every year, so that company will look elsewhere, perhaps another TLD or even a lesser (though brandable) .com.

    Interesting conversation, though.

    July 22nd, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    M. Menius

    @Gordon – “It is a standard hotel site …”

    Your point of view is way off my friend. Hotels.TV is relatively unique and distinctly different from TripAdvisor, particularly in regard to the video content which is outstanding … though you trivialize. Critiquing may not be your forte’.

    July 22nd, 2008 at 6:22 pm


    M. Menius – When I said standard I meant that you pick a city, see a list of hotels and what amenities they have. Yes it looks hipper than tripadvisor, but I still find tripadvisor infinitely more helpful.

    So I picked New York City – where 4 hotels are listed. Then I went to see the video content about the hotels, but there was none.

    So I went to Chicago, where one hotel was listed – with no video content.

    So I went to Boston, where there are 2 hotels listed – with no video content.

    I checked 10 US cities and did not find any video content, so I apologize if I wasn’t blown away by the site.

    In London, there is a lot of video content but it doesn’t do much for me. It is mostly panning shots of hotel rooms with some funky music and some screen overlays.

    I have no problem with the site, it may do great and make lots of money. I wish them luck. But this all stemmed from my initial comment where I said .tv isn’t good for booking hotel rooms, and I stand by that comment – especially since you can’t even book a hotel room on

    July 23rd, 2008 at 1:47 pm

Leave a Reply

Name *

Mail *