Re: UKNM: are .com domains necessary for startups?

[Fiona Campbell-Howes]

I'm no expert, but as an observer, if a site's only got .co.uk, it always

gives me the impression that they weren't quick/smart enough to get the

.com. Probably because the words "dotcom" and "dotcom startup" have passed

into everyday parlance.  Is it in the OED yet?


Only having .net, on the other hand, gives (me) the impression of a kind of

cliquey exclusivity - i.e. relying on people knowing about your site and

wanting to go there, rather than finding it by accident.


.com is like McDonalds

.co.uk is like Marks and Spencers

.net is like, er, The Fortean Times


I never was much good at analogies.



----- Original Message -----

From: Darren Baxter <

darrentelco4u [dot] net

>

To: <

uk-netmarketingmail [dot] chinwag [dot] com

>

Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 1:27 AM

Subject: UKNM: are .com domains necessary for startups?



> I know this was covered a while ago, but...

>

> is there an advantage or disadvantage to having only a .co.uk or .net

domain

> name without the .com?

>

> As dot coms have become established, more being registered daily, it's

> becoming nearly impossible to come up with a snappy, memorable domain

name.

>

> I believe, ideally you should have a .com, .co.uk and a .net - but does it

> really matter?

>

> What does everyone think?

>

> --

> Darren Baxter



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 looking for useful books about the new media biz?

 check out the UKNM books page for some suggestions:

 http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing/books.shtml

 Email suggestions to:

helpchinwag [dot] com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or

helpchinwag [dot] com