Thoughts on extensions like co.uk and co.in

[Jonathan]

Am I the only person who considers double extensions ugly?

I think the only exception is for the country that you are marketing to. So something.co.uk is appropriate for people in the UK, whereas something.co.in is okay for people in India. So don't take this thread as an attempt to bash on those countries or on people who have registered those extensions - share your thoughts on why they aren't worthless.

I don't feel this way about single extensions, of any sort. I mean, something.in could have a lot of value, while I'll consider something.co.in to be pretty much worthless, regardless of what the word is.

 

[Gee]

if one of your favorite internet sites has one of these extension you would have changed your opinion

the power of the extension is not by how many domains regsitered at it but how many and how good websites developed at it

i like .co.uk because many of my favorite sites that i visit everyday are @ .co.uk not the .com

i never visited twice a site @ .info , .biz , .us , .cn , ....etc

only .com .net .org & .co.uk

 

[peekaboo]

...share your thoughts on why they aren't worthless.

united kingdom is a former empire, a nation of 65 million ppl (one of the most populated in europe) one of the 7 most advanced nations in the world, a nuclear power, a magnet for immigrants from around the world... moreover, london is the biggest city in europe, and a business and cultural capital of the 'rest of the world'...

oh, and a fact that co.uk. extension is more widely used in united kingdom then .com d

 

[Jonathan]

I never said co.uk wasn't big... for people in the UK. For everybody else though.. I mean, when I see a link to a .co.uk site, I usually won't bother with it unless I know it's a news site or something like that.

 

[aidman]

I live in the uk and i only own & use the extentions:

co.uk / com / net

For me there is no value in registering domains under another country's code.

Aidman.