Several years ago, I tried to buy Peacock.com. I made an offer to the registrant, and he declined. Some time thereafter, I made another offer to try and buy the domain name, and that offer was rejected as well. The registrant told me the types of other offers he had been rejecting, and I could tell I was not going to be able to make a competitive offer to close the deal.
Yesterday morning, Jamie Zoch tweeted that NBC may have acquired Peacock.com for its new Peacock brand:
It appears that NBC has acquired premium domain name Peacock(.)com from its past owner @everettpeacock Domain has moved to privacy and changed name servers. #peacock #streaming #nbc #domain https://t.co/JTU0r67aIt
— Jamie Zoch (@DotWeekly) October 9, 2019
NBC previously announced the name of its new streaming service would be called Peacock. The branding is based off of NBC’s famous peacock logo.
Peacock.com had been registered by a person in Hawaii whose last name is Peacock. Using the Whois History tool from DomainTools, I can see that the domain name has been owned by the same registrant since at least 2001. The domain name has had public Whois records since 2001, but towards the end of September of this year, the Whois information went private. The domain name is now registered under privacy proxy at Network Solutions.
Interestingly, the Peacock.tv domain name had been registered to the same registrant as Peacock.com, but the registrant recently changed to DNStination Inc., the privacy proxy service from corporate registrar, MarkMonitor. Neither Peacock.tv nor Peacock.com resolve to an active website.
Because of my prior communication with the registrant of Peacock.com, I sent him an email reply in the same chain as our discussion about the domain name. Shortly after hitting send, my email bounced. The nameserver records were updated recently, so the registrant may no longer have access to his former @peacock.com email address. The current nameservers for both Peacock.com and Peacock.tv are set to Akamai.
Assuming NBC acquired Peacock.com and Peacock.tv for its Peacock streaming network, it will be interesting to see which url they choose to use. Having the .com will allow them to use the .TV domain name more easily, but they may simply choose to use .com like they use for their other web presence.
Dude gets paid 7 figures (my guess) by a media giant for his family name. Life writes the best stories.
Peacock.TV is better for what they are going to do. Streaming Service. .com is for selling shirts etc
With them owning the .com, it doesn’t really matter all that much.
That said, unless I am mistaken, all of the popular streaming television and video platforms use .com domain names including, Hulu, Apple TV, Amazon Prime, and Netflix.
twitch.com redirects to twitch.tv, another major is rakuten.tv (ex. wuaki.tv), and i believe the trend will be towards .tv – the undeniable advantage of making it clear what to expect: golf.tv, nhl.tv, uefa.tv, etc.
Will other networks follow?
No way will they use the .tv if they have the .com now. The .tv was probably thrown in for free.
“The registrant told me the types of other offers he had been rejecting, and I could tell I was not going to be able to make a competitive offer to close the deal.”
I had the same type of communication and heard the same thing. But he was very keen to try and sell me the .tv though and never did he claim any offer on that. This is why I think his buyers had no interest in the .tv and they probably got it bundled in because he was offering it.
Well NBC must be “Proud as a Peacock” over their acquisition and master of their domain. Btw — (.) com is not more for selling. They will do exactly what Neflix does: Netflix(.)com and then point Netflix(.)tv
Well said Kevin, the only people who think .tv is better for a streaming service is .tv domain investors.
Someone should try running an ad using a dotcom domain and also run the same ad, in a comparable location, using the .tv. My guess is the .tv ad would get a better response because the extension tells people the site features video. I think that would be the case no matter what the website was selling.
If my guess is right that’s an important fact for advertisers to know.
I guess they won’t be interested in peacock.media 🙂