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

[Silas Denyer]

I think that whole debate here will open up hugely over the next few months,

particularly with regard to .net TLDs. With the birth of the windows.net

initiative, and the wholescale march of ASPs into .net territory, together

with the much broader definitions and realities of what is a part of the

internet as opposed to local to your machine (e.g. ASPs, etc.), my own

feeling is that .net will become the next goldrush zone, as it were,

particularly in b2b instances, providing a clear differentiation between

sites you interact with as if they were shops (.coms) and services which

become a true extension to your usual ways of working (.nets).


Of couse, I would say that...


Silas Denyer

Director

turns.net


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

From: Ben Hunt <

bhuntpoulternet [dot] com

>

To: <

uknmchinwag [dot] com

>

Sent: 06 October 2000 09:53

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



> Tim's more or less right. Most people have forgotten the original list of

> TLDs (top-level domains).

>

> They are:

> .com (for a commercial enterprise)

> .net (for an *Internet business*, i.e. where your business is *about* the

> net (like an ISP) - *NOT* that it *uses* the net, because

>       EVERY F*%�+NG DOMAIN NAME BELONGS TO A F*%�+NG COMPANY THAT

> COMMUNICATES VIA THE F*%�+NG NET

> .org (for a non-profitmaking organisation: charities, political parties,

> religious groups, loonies)

> .edu (educational establishments)

> .mil (military)

> .int (I'm informed - for international businesses!? Very very rare)

>

> On top of that you get your national ones, your .co.uk .ac.uk .it .com.au

> .ca .de etc. etc. (And no, you can't register mycompany.etc!)

>

> (So the practise of bagging as many different TLDs as you can is a bit

> arse-about-tit cos it makes a mockery of the system).

>

> The rule of thumb when registering domains has been for a few years now to

> bag the .com if at all possible. Why? What do you first try when you're

> searching for a company on the web? Generally, I'll put in

> www.davesparts.com, even if Dave's Parts is a UK firm. Quite often I'll

try

> .com first even if the site isn't commercial. Don't know why I do, I guess

> it's trial and error (increasing returns taking hold - the more people

covet

> .com, the more sites go .com first, the more often I get what I want by

> trying .com, the more often I try .com first).

>

> Obviously get the .co.uk to cover your back if you're exclusively a

> uk-active company, or if you want to differentiate your site from a .com

> equivalent.

>

> I don't try .net, and in fact I don't remember .net domains. I see them as

> weak, especially now that their meaning is degraded. Freeserve changed its

> TLD from .net to .com as part of its recent brand review.

>

> I'd be interested to hear what other subscribers subconsciously tap in,

and

> what the general perception is of different TLDs.

>

> : )B

>

> Ben Hunt

> Producer

> Poulternet

>

ben [dot] huntpoulternet [dot] com

> www.poulternet.com

> 0113 383 4200

> direct: 285 6469


[Sam says: msg chopped]



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

 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