perception of domain suffixes

[Drastic]

D

Nothing says low-rent like not being able to afford a .com.

[ukgimp]

io is for startups who then buy the .com as soon as they have the cash. Wonder why :-)

[aaron]

io is for startups who then buy the .com as soon as they have the cash. Wonder why :-)

Lower upfront costs & de-risk the investment.

Show growth / market fit / build narrative thereof, then only spend on marketing after investors have invested at a higher valuation on the perception of lower risk of failure.

[Rooftop]

Thanks all

The project is currently on .co.uk but there is concern that this is putting off international customers (1. Too parochial  2. "Brand UK" isn't exactly exuding competence at the moment 3. Lower visibility as Google assumes .co.uk are mainly for UK audience).   .Com is owned by a established mid-sized player in another sector. There is not expectation that the .com will become available.

Changing the brand would undo too much past work, but tweaking it to get the .com (ie, add a word) has been discussed. Those discussions haven't got far, but they have happened.  The .net is available secondary market for a few grand, so probably worth picking up even just for brand protection.

OK, clearer question for the Americans:  If you were looking for a service, which would put you off least: .co.uk or .net ?

[Brad]

As an American, I would look at the website.  If the site stated that they had experience working for both American and British, International clients and things like spelling would conform to American norms I would have no problems with a .co.uk suffix.  I've done this when looking for forums on several subjects, if they indicate the are UK only I don't join, but if they are UK but accept Americans I might stick around.

I used to hire a Canadian web designer, she was quite capable of using American spelling and her grammar and punctuation were impeccable.  She did have a .com but there were really only three extensions back then.  Likewise, I hosted a site with a U.K. host.  Best hosting service I ever had.

But that is me.  I do think there is the risk of getting shunted off into the UK only serps on G with a co.uk.

Where do you anticipate most of this site's referrals coming from, search engines or social WOM, or adverts?  .co.uk might only be a hitch for people coming blindly from SE's.

[Drastic]

> If you were looking for a service, which would put you off least: .co.uk or .net

.net

[rcjordan]

>> If you were looking for a service, which would put you off least: .co.uk or .net

>.net

Same. ...but it's still low-rent.

[aaron]

also would prefer .net to .co.uk ... though if both were reasonably priced as the webmaster I might buy both names to have the .net site for the US & global market, and then maybe develop the .co.uk later if the UK market looks of sufficient size & scope to justify developing it.