> > A (near) perfect comparison. This discussion has been going on for a couple > > of days now without anyone mentioning the word 'brand'. dot TV is an > > immensely saleable brand, unlike .cc, .ws etc. > > > LOL. "Immensely"? Only until they run out of money. And believe me, they > will -- it's only because of moronic US VC companies that the .tv "brand" > exists. Any VC company with half a brain could see that. Unfortunately, most > US VC companies don't carry that qualification. It's the 2 letters 'TV' which are so valuable, it's the most recognized pair of letters in the world, and is effectively self-branding. That's where the value comes from. You ask people in any country on the world what 'TV' means and they know, which is more than can be said for 'ws', 'cc', 'org', 'net'.... Come back in a year's time, and see whether '.tv' is a success or not. Lee Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 10:57 AM Subject: Re: dotTV > > A (near) perfect comparison. This discussion has been going on for a couple > > of days now without anyone mentioning the word 'brand'. dot TV is an > > immensely saleable brand, unlike .cc, .ws etc. > > > LOL. "Immensely"? Only until they run out of money. And believe me, they > will -- it's only because of moronic US VC companies that the .tv "brand" > exists. Any VC company with half a brain could see that. Unfortunately, most > US VC companies don't carry that qualification. > > eg. qxl.com... > > <HOLLOW LAUGH> > > adam >
