Traditional marketing theory, at least as I learned it states that the best product name should mention or at least derive from the product's biggest benefit. This is obviously a lot less important when you have millions to build a brand, but numerous split tests by the world's best copywriters have shown people respond better when they can instantly see what a product does. I know exactly what VWO does and how I can use it just from the name. I think if you were to compare the value of the two domains you will find that having three words may be a benefit from an SEO/traffic perspective.
But that's not my point. Maybe I am completely misinterpreting your comment, but to me the reasons you give for passing over VWO are completely frivolous and lacking in substance. The time of his email determines it's newsworthiness? Do you mean that you simply were not aware of VWO before and missed Paras' emails? Now that you are aware of it, will you write a full length post about it at this time?
To me your comments smack of a valley centered arrogance and elitism that TechCrunch seems to be a mouthpiece for. Silicon Valley fads get endless coverage and everything else gets ignored. I think being an Indian startup should augment VWO's newsworthiness not detract from it. I'm not calling you out specifically, I think this attitude is widespread in tech reportig, and this story is an example.