The .uk domains spotted in the wild thread

[AlistairH]

It's like this one - she's been really badly advised here. Now all her emails are going into a black hole and her website visitors are looking at toothpaste wondering where the financial advisor went. When a single customer could be worth £1000's thats a bit of a foolish move.

Has she been really badly advised? You dont know what discussion we had around it. Sure, having the co.uk would have been amazing but for a self employed startup she has an excellent domain name that's short, memorable and being her surname has that personal touch. Bearing in mind she is not planning to become a huge corporation and having that personal touch is important for her client base so fits the brand well. Not many self employed startups would be able to aquire their surname in domain form as they'd type it and see it's already taken and stop there or if they did really want it they'd likely not have the budget to aquire it. She didn't want a longer wordier .co.uk alternative so it made total sense to go with the .uk seeing as I knew the owner and was able to aquire it.

All her emails are reaching her just fine and shes already got quite a bit of work that has come her way through the site both from new customers and other firms looking to use her as a consultant. The people that want to find her are finding her website absolutely fine.

You seem to make a lot of assumptions but what evidence do you have to backup your claims?

 

[ben]

Were you not concerned that this could be used as evidence against you in a DRS?

Nice name by the way. Positive, memorable, multi-purpose, radio test, etc. So what happened?

No, because I had basically given them the opportunity to buyout my entire brand, on the basis that the domain would be more useful for them, At this stage, I hadn't gathered any clients under the brand name. It wasn't an abusive registration, I'd registered a lot of them during RoR on the basis that I'd use one of them for a rebrand. Brightwork won and I think it's a great brand. But it was centred around dropcatching and in 2022 when Nominet moved to a new system, my business failed overnight and I decided not to continue the Brightwork brand. Still got all the merch etc. I'm wearing a Brightwork hoodie right now lol. Brightwork cap on in my profile pic. Had staff wearing Brightwork branded gear etc. the lot. But, it just didn't work out. I have considered trying something again with the brand as I have invested a lot of time into everything, but it just feels like that chapter is over now.

 

[ben]

This post makes no sense at all. You've started off saying you don't need both then went on to give a real world example of why you do need both

I have a real world example of why you'd need the .uk, not the .co.uk. Nobody in the real world gives a shit about this argument, Marek. We are in a very small box here in domainer land, you have to think outside of it. People in the real world don't give a shit about it, and will go and register brand.ai for all they care.

 

[Marek]

Has she been really badly advised?

100%, yes.

Has she been really badly advised? You dont know what discussion we had around it. Sure, having the co.uk would have been amazing but for a self employed startup she has an excellent domain name that's short, memorable and being her surname has that personal touch. Bearing in mind she is not planning to become a huge corporation and having that personal touch is important for her client base so fits the brand well. Not many self employed startups would be able to aquire their surname in domain form as they'd not have the budget to do so (because funnily they're all held by domainers!)

If you think that is memorable you're already defeated. Sure its her surname but too many people are going remember it as .co.uk

All her emails are reaching her just fine

All the ones you know about.

You seem to make a lot of assumptions but what evidence do you have to backup your claims?

I own 1000's of dropped domains, I've very familiar with emails they receive, and emails they receive which they shouldn't receive. You can also look a bit further up this thread about Ben getting loads of emails he shouldn't have.

 

[Nigel]

I think .uk is growing - yes it has been slower than expected - and I wasn't happy when it was first introduced. But we are where we are and it seems to me that in the last year or two a lot more .uk domains are being launched. Just yesterday saw a plasterers van in the local supermarket using a .uk - quite a long name so it suited the .uk on the side of the van. I looked up the .co.uk today and it is available to reg - so they preferred the .uk and can't be bothered to reg the .co.uk - but then in restricted spaces like the side of a van or on a shop sign the .uk looks better - its shorter and easier to remember - not rocket science! I wouldn't launch a new site on a .co.uk now - we have a popular long established .co.uk site that we won't be changing - but we're working on a new site at the moment and that is going on a .uk

 

[Marek]

Just yesterday saw a plasterers van in the local supermarket using a .uk - quite a long name so it suited the .uk on the side of the van. I looked up the .co.uk today and it is available to reg - so they preferred the .uk and can't be bothered to reg the .co.uk

Or the guys a plasterer, doesn't know a thing about domains and just made an awful decision. As you'd expect from a plasterer. As far as it looking better on a van or billboard or something - perfect, use your .uk but pay a tenner and get the .co.uk too and make sure both the domain redirects and you have catchall emails on the .co.uk too

I wouldn't launch a new site on a .co.uk now - we have a popular long established .co.uk site that we won't be changing - but we're working on a new site at the moment and that is going on a .uk

Are you planning on registering the .co.uk ? Or going to copy the plasterer?

 

[Nigel]

I'm sure the plasterer will do just fine - as long as he can skim ok
we've got the .co.uk and will redirect - but we've got some top notch .uk domains that I wouldn't hesitate putting a site on.

 

[Marek]

but we've got some top notch .uk domains that I wouldn't hesitate putting a site on.

For us the major issue with this is the more successful your .uk gets, the more you'll feel you now need to acquire the .co.uk to avoid type ins, lost emails, brand confusion issues etc. But the more successful your .uk gets, the more the .co.uk owner is going to hold you to ransom on negotiations. So you're somewhat potentially backing yourself into a really expensive disaster later on.

 

[Nigel]

so you may be holding a .uk for a lucrative area, where you have no hope of buying the .co.uk, or it is so expensive that it isn't an option - but it is for a descriptive term that has no trademark issues - and you are able to get a large slice of that lucrative area on the back of a memorable .uk domain. I don't see launching a site as a potential 'really expensive disaster' - more likely that you'll have people knocking on your door one day wanting to buy that domain/website.

 

[Nigel]

NationalParks.uk is a website that I noticed recently. Nice site - must get a lot of traffic (with the .co.uk pointed to it).

 

[Marek]

so you may be holding a .uk for a lucrative area, where you have no hope of buying the .co.uk, or it is so expensive that it isn't an option - but it is for a descriptive term that has no trademark issues - and you are able to get a large slice of that lucrative area on the back of a memorable .uk domain. I don't see launching a site as a potential 'really expensive disaster' - more likely that you'll have people knocking on your door one day wanting to buy that domain/website.

How couldn't you get a share of that lucrative market without a single specific .uk?

You're way more likely to put off any future acquisitions later if you don't have the pair.

MacleansMortgages.co.uk is a million times better than Macleans.uk (no we don't sell tooth paste, stop asking)

 

[Nigel]

that's your opinion Marek - a lot of us think otherwise.

 

[Marek]

You're all welcome to be as wrong as you like

 

[AlistairH]

100%, yes.


If you think that is memorable you're already defeated. Sure its her surname but too many people are going remember it as .co.uk

Again just more assumptions.


Just to be clear by the way, I do agree that the .co.uk extension is still the most popular, I'm not trying to say otherwise here. Of course having the .co.uk would have been ideal.. however you need to put it into context, her services are based offline and she doesn't expect or require hundreds of people to land on her site each day. She's not looking to to be the next big website so in some instances, especially for smaller businesses the .uk will do just fine and it's proving to do so for her already.

And in some instances is owning a nice dictionary word .uk better than a longer wordier alternative .co.uk? I'd say definitely so, which is why it is growing in popularity amongst smaller businesses, because it works fine for them.

 

[AlistairH]

MacleansMortgages.co.uk is a million times better than Macleans.uk (no we don't sell tooth paste, stop asking)

Well considering she doesn't do mortgages it definitely isn't For arguements sake though.. out of those two the shorther surname .uk is far more attractive.

Its pretty clear from her site that she isn't flogging toothpaste so no she's not going to receive emails asking about toothpaste.

 

[Backyard5562]

Has she been really badly advised? You dont know what discussion we had around it. Sure, having the co.uk would have been amazing but for a self employed startup she has an excellent domain name that's short, memorable and being her surname has that personal touch. Bearing in mind she is not planning to become a huge corporation and having that personal touch is important for her client base so fits the brand well. Not many self employed startups would be able to aquire their surname in domain form as they'd type it and see it's already taken and stop there or if they did really want it they'd likely not have the budget to aquire it. She didn't want a longer wordier .co.uk alternative so it made total sense to go with the .uk seeing as I knew the owner and was able to aquire it.

All her emails are reaching her just fine and shes already got quite a bit of work that has come her way through the site both from new customers and other firms looking to use her as a consultant. The people that want to find her are finding her website absolutely fine.

You seem to make a lot of assumptions but what evidence do you have to backup your claims?

Definitely.

If you search macleans.uk you get macleans.co.uk as the top result.

Her linkedin page probably gets more visits than the website, which seems to have about 10 different versions of the same page indexed with "copy" in the URL.

Macleans.co.uk would be great. Macleans.uk when the .co.uk is taken and is a toothpaste website, is not a good solution.

I'd rather have lindsaymaclean.co.uk or something like macleanlegal.co.uk.

I suppose in the grand scheme of things it plays little part, as a website won't be her main source of clientele.

 

[Nigel]

I typed 'macleans wills and estates' into google and it came up first in search results. Didn't see toothpaste anywhere.

 

[Marek]

Definitely.

If you search macleans.uk you get macleans.co.uk as the top result.

This is really the end of the conversion here, she's completely and utterly fucked Google wise and if the people advising her can't understand that she's sending her own brand searches to a toothpaste company she's in a not good position.

 

[Marek]

I typed 'macleans wills and estates' into google and it came up first in search results. Didn't see toothpaste anywhere.

How many people do you think will search for that long, hand selected to prove your point phrase compared to 'macleans' or 'macleans.uk' ?

 

[ben]

You only need to be on the first page to be seen. Searching for macleans brings up the toothpaste on .co.uk, because it's been there for decades and has a lot of SEO. Underneath it is a Canadian magazine. Now, I am willing to bet money on it, that if you invest enough time into macleans.uk you could rank second above macleans.ca, because they next one after that is a bakery in Scotland ...

In fact, I will go a step further and say that you could probably rank above macleans.co.uk with enough effort, it's just a landing page. Probably gets thin content warnings all day long.