Is .tv extensions the future?

[librarc]

I was wondering, in this age where sites are moving from static to dynamic; where audio and/or video streaming is common place, would the 'media-ish' sounding exstension ".TV" would be the way to go? Is that why it is so much more expensive than .com's, net's, org's etc.?

[jo1ene]

would the 'media-ish' sounding exstension ".TV" would be the way to go?

I doubt it. And .tv extensions are no more expesive to register than .com. Where did you get that idea?

[librarc]

Well I purchased a .com and a .tv on godaddy; it cost me 8.95 and 29.95 respectively! Thanks for your opinion anyway.

[uk_webber]

If you own a T.V. channel or from somewhere like Tasivkia then maybe.

[Freedom]

There was an article on .tv extensions in a recent issue of Business 2.0

Basically, it said that the island nation associated with that TLD was promised that it would be a big hit when it came out years ago, but that it flopped big time.

.tv has been around awhile, it's better then many other TLDs but still not a major player.

[uk_webber]

Ok what would you say the order was of TLDs...

1. com
2. org
3. net
4. tv
5. info

?

[gpmgroup]

.tv has an advantage because it can be (and is to some degree be heavily promoted) by the mainstream media.

Channel 5 in the UK use it and appears frequently between programs and sometimes in Current Affairs.

Having said that ."tv" is very specfic ".info" is far more generic.

.tv is far more expensive & .info are likely to be very cheap for most of 2005

as to resale value order

.com
.ccTLD (.co.uk , .de etc & including .us!)

.net
.info
.org / .biz - Non commercial / Commercial

.tv .cc .ws .bz etc

[bill]

Basically, it said that the island nation associated with that TLD was promised that it would be a big hit when it came out years ago, but that it flopped big time.

Could that be because they charged so much for it in the beginning that few people bothered? I remember seeing astronomical prices when they first came out. Since then I haven't even considered a .tv domain...although I thought it was a neat domain when it first came out.

[tomda]

Ok what would you say the order was of TLDs...
1. com
2. org
3. net
4. tv
5. info

6. st from Sao-Tome and Principe

[uk_webber]

Would people really put .info over .org?

[reborn]

For an informational site, IMO, .info is better than .org. Consider, for example, getawidget.info and getawidget.org. Which one sounds better?

[SlimKim]

I value domains in this order:

.com
.net
.us
.org
.info
.tv

Bear in mind the real value depends on your target audience.

If your target audience is Canada the the real value might look like this:

.com
.ca
.net

By the way, I have sites with .us and .tv domains. I agree that .tv will cost 3 to 5 times as much as a dot com.

You can really get caught up in buying available domain names from lesser demand domain extensions

at one time I almost bought dating.md it was unregistered. I know of one highly popular medical field followed by .md that is available.

The thing is, almost no one knows what to do with it. A couple of years ago I seen a huge billboard in the capital of Arkansas advertising a hospital / clinic directory called Arkansas.md The site is still live but gets no traffic to speak of. The average guy don't know what to do with such a url.

I talked with a full time business consultant who had no clue of any extensions other than .com .net and .org.

Lots of folks mistakenly think you have to be a medical organization to buy a .md ... not so ... it's a country extension which kinda had such guidelines but no one followed them. Examples ... most all the popular gambling keywords followed by .md are taken and many active.

I kept one .tv and let the rest expire. It was for an exact match of the most often searched for mortgage related term. I developed it, but so far it hasn't been successful on the scale I'd like.

Yesterdays news reports of tenative approval for .jobs and .mobi

Good Luck

[tedster]

I recently helped develop a .tv domain that is used as the response/destination for a television spot. By using .tv we could get the exact domain name we wanted. And because it was a response to a tv spot, the unusual extension has proven to be no problem at all - and perhaps even a plus. In fact we are seeing 65% of the uniques (bots excluded) convert and the volume is beyond our initial projection.

I can see that .tv might be a touchy TLD to use for domain speculation, but it sure can be a help in specific cases such as this. And the little bit extra that registration costs is certainly a negligible part of the overall development cost.

[top5jamaica]

i would only go for .TV if REALLY REALLY needed a specific name and the .whateverelse was already gone and would be too expensive otherwise.

coz getting a.TV doesn't even really help you for branding because not everyone will hear a domainname.tv and go there .. they're still probably inclined to think the domainname.com

[tedster]

I think that "second tier" TLDs can help branding in some circumstances. For instance (my examples are imaginary):

1. The domain has obvious initials that are mirrored by the TLD: CalicoCorner.cc

2. The domain is connected to a broadcast or broadband venture: AlbumRock.fm or Rerun.tv

3. Some play on words connects the domain name and the TLD, so the TLD is a strong part of the brandname: ... I tried to find a suggestive example for this approach, and every example I thought of already resolved.

So it's an exercise in creativity (as is most branding activity, right?)

[conroy]

I like .org over .info quite a bit. .org carries much more authoritative weight. .info looks cheesy imo.

[SlimKim]

.pro is available to folks in the US, UK, Canada and Germany priced at $295 US over at domainpeople

This week ICCAN has tenatively approved .jobs and .mobi

They have a list of 9 new extensions which they expect to approve all of. They approved .travel and .post back in October ... I don't think anyone is selling them yet.

I'm not planning to buy any of them

[cyberair]

.tv outside of the Television area is a little improper in my opinion.

As for .info and .org, with the exception of the company being an ORGanization, I see .info much better aimed for the general audience. I've seen some advertisements already using .info's plus it has some very elaborate websites developed which provide strong reputation to the extension.