.net or .co ?

[trl711]

The .com owner of the desired domain refuses to sell the domain (even though it is essentially a parked site and has been for the past 5+ years). Currently, our site resides on .net. I hear that many associate .net domains with dated and too techy. What is better? A .net or a .co?

[FrankDawg]

I totally get where you're coming from.  The squatter situation is extremely frustrating to be sure and isn't getting better any time soon.  If you can't make a trademark claim, it will be extremely difficult to get someone to sell who has no interest in selling.

With regards to settling, I hear what you're saying.  I just personally feel that the .net is too big of an issue to overcome.  Whether we like it or not, people have been trained to throw a .com after everything.  If they see a mention of your brand, they'll likely assume the website will be located at [yourbrandname].com.  If you are using a domain with a .net and someone else has the .com, expect to see quite a bit of your traffic go to the .com.

Think about all the names of companies and brands that are complete nonsense words (or extremely obscure words).  Grabbing a URL that is keyword focused will potentially help you with SEO, but it is often extremely difficult to build a long term brand around.  Also, keep in mind that keyword rich URLs may help in the short term for SEO purposes, but they can be extremely limiting if the company wants to expand beyond the keywords.  Even Moz had to go through this, changing from SEOMoz.org to Moz.com (as the old name limited the brand to being solely focused on SEO).

Hope this helps!

Mike

[trl711]

Thank you for your input, Michael. In your opinion, when will it not be "settling?" With the continuously growing number of sites in addition to the number of squatters, don't you think we will, as users, eventually have to accept non-.com TLDs? As a user I'd rather go to bestthing.net than thisisthenextbestthing.com (extreme example, but hopefully you see what I'm saying).

[FrankDawg]

I'd go .net personally.  Been around longer, more trusted and you won't be sending as much confused/fatfinger traffic to the guy who has the .com as you would if you went with .co (for obvious reasons).

That said, your best option is to come up with a new name for a domain that is either currently available or is available for sale at a reasonable price.  There's no reason to settle for a .net or .co (and you are settling) when there are plenty of viable .com options.  There are countless examples of companies being highly successful with completely made up names.  It isn't about the name.  It's about what you put behind the name from a branding perspective.

[Bryan_Loconto]

I like your style Ryan! Excellent add-vice

[RyanPurkey]

You could focus group the two and see which people prefer.  Or you could buy several and test their performance via Adwords split testing before taking the plunge of transferring or creating the new site.  Really this boils down to not what has possibly worked for others, but what works best for you.

[Bryan_Loconto]

Hey TLR711!!

Oh man that's unfortunate that he is just sitting on it like that. But what can you do?

I would go with the .net as it is a TLD.