How important is a .com?

[Gordon - Commercial Finance]

Hi there
I'm looking at setting up a new website for another project, and just trying to look into domain names that are available relating to what I want to do. Is it still the case that the .com is always the most important one to have? Or are things like .finance now becoming mainstream and just as good?
From force of habit I always just aim to get .com and .co.uk for the sake of brand protection, but is that even still necessary? If I can get a good domain with .finance, is that a strong enough prospect?

Thanks

 

[Darren C]

It can be tempting to go for one of these new TLDs but registration fees are often more expensive and there is still a lot of confusion about them.

.com and .uk domains are so well established that you can't really dismiss them; even if you did opt for the alternative.

 

[ryedale]

The vast majority of the people we work with on a daily basis have no idea about the new extensions and it just causes confusion. I honestly wouldn't bother and stick to the traditional ones.

 

[webhostuk]

.Com and co.uk are ruler nothing can match them. But if you can grab good brand name and traffic to any other tld and get a successfull business done using that TLD , which is possible if you get the right SEO, social media and adwords marketing then all is good with any TLD you select.

 

[WebStartupSolutions]

If your market is worldwide go for .com, if your market is based in uk go for .co.uk, anything else is just a gimmick and you'll struggle to get it ranked on google

 

[yuzi87]

I was a day one adopter for the new .co domains, Every single person I told our website or email was www.**********.co would say .com or .co.uk? and every email sent to us was typed .com or .co.uk and never got through......... I then bought the .com from an American company and have never looked back

 

[ADW]

Searching for a domain yesterday and found a great one to fit the purpose but again not a standard and commonly known TLD. It works great and will actually be easy to remember... probably more so than the .co.uk. Does google still kill off the use of these domains when it works that well?

 

[fisicx]

Will it be easy for google to remember?

If someone types the domain name (without TLD) into google will the .co.uk or .com be suggested or your new obscure TLD?

If someone remember the business name will they really remember the TLD or will the automatically head for the .co.uk?

 

[ADW]

The TLD creates the phrase. e.g. say you had www.burgerbar.co.uk but instead you can have www.burger.bar. I understand the regular .com or co.uk would be preferable, but this far down the road in domain world most have been sucked up. So how detrimental would they be? I personally hate the .co and other types like that but if a worded tld could really fit is it then still not worthwhile. We are not talking massive marketing budgets either. More of a word of mouth / social media bit then adwords etc.

 

[fisicx]

Its possible it could work but people looking for the site on google would search for burger bar + location. However, I do get where you are coming from and it could work well. You won't know until you try. I've got a friend who had a new type tld struggled until she went back to .co.uk. Ranking shot up as did the number of visitors (because people could now find her).

 

[ADW]

Still early days I guess. $8k to buy the .com domain to have a play with a project or get exactly the same brand ability with a new style TLD. Might be easier just to just go with an okay-ish domain name with a .com/.co.uk.

 

[Ogdens' Nut Gone Flake]

.co.uk is the king of click through in the UK.

Let's say someone in the UK is looking to buy a drone for someone's birthday next week and their search gives them the following top 3 results:

BuyDrones.com
Buy.Drones
BuyDrones.co.uk

The first two could be from anywhere. I don't want to waste my time clicking on them and finding they're American companies. The .co.uk however tells me I'm almost certainly dealing with a UK business who can get me my drone pretty damn sharpish.

 

[fisicx]

Except it more likely to be:

BuyDrones.com
BuyDrones.co.uk

whole load of drone sites

Buy.Drones

 

[deanpunchard]

Surely it depends on how you're driving traffic to your site, and who your audience is?

I personally haven't looked back from moving from arddigital.co.uk to punch.digital
The move was part of a make-over, and I always had an issue saying "ard digital" clearly over the phone, without spelling it out.
I knew my choice had worked a few days after switching when I called someone, explained who I was, and they went to the website without any issues or stumbling blocks.

I think the .com and .uk addresses will be "prime" site names, but not the be-all of websites. As we use these unusual extensions more and more, they'll soon become the norm. I'm just waiting for someone like google or amazon to use say www.search.google or www.books.amazon
Once businesses like this are onboard, people won't think twice.

 

[Talay]

Surely it depends on how you're driving traffic to your site, and who your audience is?

I personally haven't looked back from moving from arddigital.co.uk to punch.digital
The move was part of a make-over, and I always had an issue saying "ard digital" clearly over the phone, without spelling it out.
I knew my choice had worked a few days after switching when I called someone, explained who I was, and they went to the website without any issues or stumbling blocks.

I think the .com and .uk addresses will be "prime" site names, but not the be-all of websites. As we use these unusual extensions more and more, they'll soon become the norm. I'm just waiting for someone like google or amazon to use say www.search.google or www.books.amazon
Once businesses like this are onboard, people won't think twice.

Your business might get more recognition because of the change but it isn't because of a switch to .digital but simply because you ditched a difficult name for a simpler one.

KISS !

 

[deanpunchard]

Your business might get more recognition because of the change but it isn't because of a switch to .digital but simply because you ditched a difficult name for a simpler one.

KISS !

Yes totally agree with you. I could have stuck with a .co.uk address, but to me there was no advantage. the .digital makes it easier for me. My point is that a .com or .co.uk isn't always the best, and with a bit of creativity, or thinking differently, you can use these new domains to your advantage.

 

[Talay]

Yes totally agree with you. I could have stuck with a .co.uk address, but to me there was no advantage. the .digital makes it easier for me. My point is that a .com or .co.uk isn't always the best, and with a bit of creativity, or thinking differently, you can use these new domains to your advantage.

Err....No.

You would have been better off taking a .co.uk or .com address without some convoluted company name people could not understand.

punch.couk or punch.com or punchxxx.co.uk or punchxxx.com would be better (xxx being your choice).

 

[deanpunchard]

I guess that's where we'll agree to disagree

For myself having a shorter, easier to say and type URL out weighs the need for a .co.uk or .com and as people become more aware and use to these new URL formats then I don't see there being any difference.

 

[Davek0974]

Except it more likely to be:

BuyDrones.com
BuyDrones.co.uk

whole load of drone sites

Buy.Drones

I always tend to go for .co.uk when browsing for something to buy.

 

[fisicx]

Com is important if you think that people will know your name well (e.g. Microsoft) and try to go directly to your website by typing in the name plus DOT COM.

Unless you are in the UK then people expect .co.uk

For myself having a shorter, easier to say and type URL out weighs the need for a .co.uk or .com and as people become more aware and use to these new URL formats then I don't see there being any difference.

Except I googled 'punch digital' and got a US business called punchteam.com and a punchdigital in Autralia

 

[deanpunchard]

Unless you are in the UK then people expect .co.uk


Except I googled 'punch digital' and got a US business called punchteam.com and a punchdigital in Autralia

Granted my SEO might be poor right now, I'd still rather have punch.digital over punchanythingelse.co.uk

Maybe that's just me, and perhaps one day it'll bite me in the ass!

 

[fisicx]

Why not have both and redirect. That way people will always end up on the right site

 

[deanpunchard]

Of course if punch.com or punch.co.uk ever became free, then of course I'd look to buy it.

Also from what I understand, google changed a few years ago so the actual words in a URL count very little towards ranking. Some people still believe the URL name has a great effect on ranking, over things like content and speed.

 

[fisicx]

or punchdigital.co.uk. That's the one people will think of first.

 

[DontAsk]

I always tend to go for .co.uk when browsing for something to buy.

Why restrict your choice?

I always add site:uk to the search if I want a UK site. Many will be .com but based in the UK. Still seems to work.

 

[Ursicles]

I went for .co.uk, but also bought the .com domain name.
For a homecare company it was felt having uk in the domain name made us some more local, than a .com who could potentially sound like its more global.

 

[fisicx]

I always add site:uk to the search if I want a UK site. Many will be .com but based in the UK. Still seems to work.

I switched to a .com for one of my sites and I started to get a lot more international enquiries.

 

[Junie Rutkevich]

.com tld is more like for branding, SEO-wise, it doesn't really matter. Google treats all TLDs the same. And not all TLDs are expensive, there are under $1 TLDs (such as .clan).

 

[The Business Bible]

If you don't see your business expanding outside of the UK then .uk or .co.uk (or both) would be the ones to go for.