.tel is very strange

Everyone knows about the shortcomings of .tel (bad SEO + bad design) and it would be easy to present a solution for it (text content + Telnames design + sub domains for Telnic customers + directory), but Telnic doesn't want to invest a little bit time for programming.

Instead of giving 210,000 customers (formerly 330,000 customers) what they need, Telnic tries to reach out at Telnames for new customers by strong reduction of product features. (Crazy idea!)

Telnic is criticized justifiably for the lack in openness, development and communication, but Telnic doesn't want to change anything.

Can anyone explain why Telnic is doing everything to be unsuccessful?

as wrote:it would be easy to present a solution for it (text content + Telnames design + sub domains for Telnic customers + directory), but Telnic doesn't want to invest a little bit time for programming.

One day a genius will come and will do exactly this. Unfortunately it seems that Telnic doesn't employ someone who understands what you mean and how important it is.

as wrote:Can anyone explain why Telnic is doing everything to be unsuccessful?

We all are wondering about it since long.
It would be so easy to deliver just one useful template, but Telnic just don't want to develop it.
There is only one option: All Internet experts on this planet must be wrong - and only Telnic found the Sorcerer's Stone.

Maybe they have developed new super powerful tel strategy but waiting when premium names will be dropped to gather some domain harvest :))

What do you think about so stupid management of the company?


It will be very interesting to hear the views of domain experts.
Especially those that correctly predicted the progress of the situation with dottel.
May somebody ask them?

ily.tel wrote:Maybe they have developed new super powerful tel strategy but waiting when premium names will be dropped to gather some domain harvest :))

No, the opposite was and is the case:
1. NN.tel and LL.tel have been released in 2011 without the needed marketing and they are in the hand of domain investors now.
2. Many, many 1A premium domains that have been registered during Landrush expired in 2012 and have been snapped only by domain investors.
3. Long numeric .tels will be released this month without any marketing again.
Only from these 3 examples you can see that Telnic is making a lot of mistakes.

The funny thing is that the longer Telnic waits with developing the .tel platform, the more domains are in the hands of domain investors.
This could be a surprising effect, but at second glance it's very logical:
Businesses and individuals will notice after 1 or 2 years that .tel doesn't bring them any advantage and will always drop it as long .tel is a naked scaffold.
Meanwhile only people believing in a long-term success will take over. And that are only people planning their investment with the knowledge that no revenues will be visible the next 5 or 10 years.

ily.tel wrote:It will be very interesting to hear the views of domain experts.
Especially those that correctly predicted the progress of the situation with dottel.
May somebody ask them?

I assume this statement summed it up: http://domainnamewire.com/2013/05/02/a-look-at-tels-14-year-25-million-journey/

They don't even think that "One in time is better than three times correctly" (Russian adage)

Expert wrote:2. Many, many 1A premium domains that have been registered during Landrush expired in 2012 and have been snapped only by domain investors.

Telnic was not capable to develop something within 3 years to keep the customers (for only $10 renewal fee) who had originally invested a lot of money ($300 registration fee per domain).

I want to take this opportunity to praise Name.com for what they did pre-registration of two-character domains at the regular price which I took (they took for me) 7 seconds after the end of two-character landrush

//One of my Domains Registration Date: Tue Jun 14 14:00:07 GMT 2011

300 is better to spend on cTLD for domain hacks or LL, LLL if you'd like to create something "mobile first"