Comments on: My Take on .TV (& Other TLD)

By: Gordon

Gordon — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:47:31 +0000

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 hotels.tv

By: M. Menius

M. Menius — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:22:00 +0000

@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’.

By: Ms Domainer

Ms Domainer — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:37:34 +0000

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.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:33:38 +0000

Sanchay,

I have never visited lonelyplanet.tv, and it doesn’t look like many other people have either:
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/tripadvisor.com+lonelyplanet.com+lonelyplanet.tv/?metric=uv

But that’s the thing – I don’t have a problem with .tv, and obviously video is getting bigger every day online. I think lonelyplanet.tv (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.

By: Ty

Ty — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 06:55:14 +0000

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