Why Do Short Brandable Domains Make Stronger Brands Than Generic Domains?

[AJ Jones]

Why Do Short Brandable Domains Make Stronger Brands Than Generic Domains?
BUT forums are still filled with people who think domains like "FloridaHouseholdProteinDrinks.info" are more valuable than smarter shorter brand-able domains?

 

[peter]

i think you are using the term brandable in the domainer way = names that don't mean anything and are often LESS brandable.

There is no such thing as a brandable name because ALL NAMES ARE BRANDABLE. In fact, the names that domainers often like to call brandable are often LESS brandable than strong generic names. This is self-explanatory in the internet age, even after the google EMD update. Only a fool would choose sweetr.com over candy.com, and he would have to work a hell of a lot more to "brand" his domain.

Your second question is unrelated to this fact and just has to do with domainers love for EMD's (if that was what you were referring to).

EMD = exact match domain

 

[AJ Jones]

I think "candy.com" is a lot different from "USChocolateCandySuppliers.com" (and trust me, I have seen domains like this A LOT). I would never dispute the equity of a domain such as candy.com, money.com, homes.com, etc.

However, if you ever look at Alexa top sites (or simply stop and think about the most major online brands), you’d notice a trend. Among the top brands, you’ll find nearly every form of short brandable domain imaginable, and very few EMD's or generic domains.

How come "Search.com" isn't as popular as yahoo or google? What in the world is a google? So is it really that they had to work a "hell of a lot more" or just be a "hell of a lot more creative or smarter" and just think outside the box. Especially if you know that everybody is taking the "easier" generic route.

Videos.com vs YouTube.com
Flickr.com vs Photos.com
eBay.com vs BuyOnline.com (?)
FaceBook.com vs KeepInTouch.com (?)
Pinterest.com vs Share.com (?)

Thanks for the reply and really great points, I really just want to create a dialogue and see what people think about this. Perhaps there are really no right or wrong answers. I think it may just begin with the intention of the domainer... whether it's to monetize, flip, squat, resell, build, brand, etc.

Thanks,

AJ

 

[katherine]

Why Do Short Brandable Domains Make Stronger Brands Than Generic Domains?

One word: differentiation.

 

[AJ Jones]

@katherine Exactly!

 

[peter]

I think "candy.com" is a lot different from "USChocolateCandySuppliers.com" (and trust me, I have seen domains like this A LOT). I would never dispute the equity of a domain such as candy.com, money.com, homes.com, etc.

However, if you ever look at Alexa top sites (or simply stop and think about the most major online brands), you’d notice a trend. Among the top brands, you’ll find nearly every form of short brandable domain imaginable, and very few EMD's or generic domains.

How come "Search.com" isn't as popular as yahoo or google? What in the world is a google? So is it really that they had to work a "hell of a lot more" or just be a "hell of a lot more creative or smarter" and just think outside the box. Especially if you know that everybody is taking the "easier" generic route.

Videos.com vs YouTube.com
Flickr.com vs Photos.com
eBay.com vs BuyOnline.com (?)
FaceBook.com vs KeepInTouch.com (?)
Pinterest.com vs Share.com (?)

Thanks for the reply and really great points, I really just want to create a dialogue and see what people think about this. Perhaps there are really no right or wrong answers. I think it may just begin with the intention of the domainer... whether it's to monetize, flip, squat, resell, build, brand, etc.

Thanks,

AJ

I have never said that there aren't many so called "brandable" names that have been turned into great services. Perhaps many of the biggest.

But that is hardly the point we were discussing. If you look at the examples you are pointing to, what they all have in common is that they are great services with tons of talent behind them doing something "new" online. What we are talking about are the names themselves. I don't really think it matters if facebook had chosen friends.com or something similar (keepintouch??) or face.com or book.com or facebook.com. I might as well turn it around and ask: are you saying that pinterest is doing better than if they had chosen share.com all other factors the same?

Again, you keep bringing up the fact that people are selling shit names, but what point are you trying to make? Domains are like any other commodity and will range from gravel to diamonds. The fact that you see people selling a lot of gravel on the forum should perhaps lead you to ask why they are trying to peddle it so hard? If you on the other hand follow the upper end of the market, newsletters, auctions and other venues, you will see the diamonds being offered. Please clarify what point you are trying to make.

 

[AJ Jones]

@ peter I don't understand your point or your frustration at all. As I stated earlier, I just wanted to create a dialogue for people to discuss this topic. I thought that is what forums were about. I also ended my comment by saying "Perhaps there are really no right or wrong answers..."

So for you to take this personally was definitely not the objective nor did I and nor would I ever imply that people are selling "shit" domains in this forum or any for that matter, as you so eloquently stated.

So for you to take this personally, apparently you missed the concept of this discussion.

Last time I checked, the thread topic is "Why Do Short Brandable Domains Make Stronger Brands Than Generic Domains?" not "Why Are We Trying To Peddle Shit Domains?"

Regards.

 

[CorrectName.Com]

Opinions vary so, and of course all domains are one of a kind. It only takes a few OMG type sales to go through, or perhaps someone who read the wrong material, or read little, to register less than perfect names.

Look at our industry and short names, yes short .coms tend to be better, but look at all 4l.com being taken. So many of them are worse than unregged 5-6 letter .coms

If you look at the collectible market and think about one of a kind items, prices vary a great deal, just like domains.

If you look at the domain market, and then compare it to real estate, look how young it is. Then further if you compare it to RE even more, "experts" there can not decide true value or direction either.

So many factors involved....Just as google changes the rules, often people decide that domain values has changed.

All domains are one of a kind and subject to personal opinion more than most any other items on the planet, one of a kind digital items with a short past and unsure future.

 

[peter]

LOL i must have sounded way more harsh than I intended. Sorry for that Sometimes forums aren't the easiest of places to communicate emotions, especially in your second language. I am not frustrated or angry at all. And it is more or less the standard of the business to refer to the lower end of the quality spectrum of domains as "pigeon shit" domains, feel free to check your favorite domain-blog or google: "pigeon shit domains".

I also really enjoy to discuss domains in all aspects, one of my favorite hobbies actually. Personally, I only invest in very strong quality names, and only hold around 30 or so, all superb in my eyes, so I am not really personally affected by these posts.

I realize you are new to this forum, so I might take the time to explain that the so called "brandables" have been debated time and time again over the last 10 years I have spent here, so I suppose I am taking some things for granted in our discussion.

You were the one who brought up the fact that some people on the forum are selling lower quality names on the forum in your original post, not me. I just fail to see what we are supposed to discuss related to that, or why it comes as news. By definition, these names are more likely to get peddled at venues such as this, since people will most likely want to get rid of them. Like I stated earlier, higher quality names still exist in the portfolios of our forum-members, but they are more often than not sold in more secluded channels, such as PM, newsletters, auctions etc.

Ten years ago, alot of the names perceived as lower quality and sold for next to nothing would today be considered gems and sold for many multiples. Many, many "ultra premium" names changed hands here on the forum back in the day, on quite a regular basis, for healthy sums. Like I mentioned, these have tended to shift to other venues, following the buyers if you will.

To return to your thread title, you are assuming that short brandable domains make stronger brands than generic domains, without a shred of evidence to back this up. The fact that google, ebay, pinterest etc. are successful, are not because of their domain names, like both of us agreed earlier. I am not saying that these made up names don't bring anything to table in terms of quirkyness.

 

[AJ Jones]

No problem at all. Also, I never used the word "lower quality"... I said "more valuable" and I was only relating "value" in relation to Alexa top sites - but for this discussion only, for I understand that true "value" is not determined by Alexa, but by each individual "gravel" or "diamond" dealer... to use your analogy.

Also, I am new to this forum, but I am not new to this industry at all.

Regards

 

[AJ Jones]

@FirstPlaceNames Great reply!

 

[Biggie]

Why Do Short Brandable Domains Make Stronger Brands Than Generic Domains?
BUT forums are still filled with people who think domains like "FloridaHouseholdProteinDrinks.info" are more valuable than smarter shorter brand-able domains?

people who think domains like "FloridaHouseholdProteinDrinks.info" are more valuable than smarter shorter brand-able domains.... have been led to believe that is true, based on the "posted" requests looking for them and the "reported" sales of them.

those two factors, create a pool of those type of domains to choose from and therefore, a potential market of buyers and sellers of them.

I think "candy.com" is a lot different from "USChocolateCandySuppliers.com" (and trust me, I have seen domains like this A LOT). I would never dispute the equity of a domain such as candy.com, money.com, homes.com, etc.

However, if you ever look at Alexa top sites (or simply stop and think about the most major online brands), you’d notice a trend. Among the top brands, you’ll find nearly every form of short brandable domain imaginable, and very few EMD's or generic domains.

How come "Search.com" isn't as popular as yahoo or google? What in the world is a google? So is it really that they had to work a "hell of a lot more" or just be a "hell of a lot more creative or smarter" and just think outside the box. Especially if you know that everybody is taking the "easier" generic route.

Videos.com vs YouTube.com
Flickr.com vs Photos.com
eBay.com vs BuyOnline.com (?)
FaceBook.com vs KeepInTouch.com (?)
Pinterest.com vs Share.com (?)

Thanks for the reply and really great points, I really just want to create a dialogue and see what people think about this. Perhaps there are really no right or wrong answers. I think it may just begin with the intention of the domainer... whether it's to monetize, flip, squat, resell, build, brand, etc.

Thanks,

AJ

the reason why short domains names like "search" may not be a popular as "google" is because....

terms like google, flickr, yahoo, pinterest, groupon, youtube, etc are viewed as "cool and innovative" by perception, ala the next "new thing" in comparison to a more generic term that has obvious meaning.

there is nothing "new" about an old term, unless you use the term in an unrelated way to it's obvious meaning.

example; kayak.com being used as a search engine as opposed to selling kayaks
(side note, priceline is reportly buying kayak)

another example of an "old" word going new is "green", where the association of a "color", has changed to an association with a global conciousness of being in tune with nature, and with sustainability and recycling efforts.


the "strength" of a brand is determined by that brands' respective customers and or users, along with their expressed, perceived or tabulated loyalty to it.


imo...

 

[Gerry]

One word: differentiation.

Second Word: Memorable

 

[AJ Jones]

@biggedon WOW! I really like the juxtaposition you used referring to "old" word "new" meaning. And it's makes perfect since, because even when I think of the word "green" particular in domain names - it's usually not the color, but conversation, earth, or as you stated global consciousness. Great post! Thanks for sharing and really opening it up!

 

[Johnn]

The best thing to do is to ask your wife if she thinks short is better long?

 

[katherine]

Second Word: Memorable

Yayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.

@biggedon WOW! I really like the juxtaposition you used referring to "old" word "new" meaning. And it's makes perfect since, because even when I think of the word "green" particular in domain names - it's usually not the color, but conversation, earth, or as you stated global consciousness. Great post! Thanks for sharing and really opening it up!

Which leads us to one observation: keywords are still important. They convey more than a meaning, they convey emotions too.

A Dallas Realtor might want to own a generic domain like DallasRealEstate.com because he's not branded as an individual, whereas this domain perfectly describes his business.
On the other hand, the large networks like Century21 are branded and well-known.

Many companies still use generic domains to complement their Internet presence, often as redirects. Even when your corporate name is a brandable name, generics can and should be part of your web strategy, if only for the credibility, traffic, and memorability.

"FloridaHouseholdProteinDrinks.info" is not a good example of generic domain. It hardly is. It is more a long tail domain.

The post by Peter is also a reminder that the successful companies usually have great domains, this is not by chance.

 

[AJ Jones]

@Johnn Nice one!! LOL! She'd definitely want long, BUT with low competition.

 

[AJ Jones]

@katherine I agree. I also believe domains such as DallasRealEstate.com, SouthBeachRentals.com, or even BestCaribbeanBeaches.com are extremely relevant and in most cases will have much more impact than the shorter alternatives, such as google, etc. If I'm in New York City and looking to invest in Dallas Real Estate or looking for a South Beach rental property those would meet my search criteria perfectly.

My question is, how come they don't make stronger brands than the shorter "brand-able" alternatives. @Gerry used the word memorable, which I really loved, because a lot of my clients want me to come up with that perfect "memorable" brand name, but they also want to own "search" as it relates to EMD's.

So a client may want a cool name for their multiplayer gaming business, like "GAAMR", but they also want to own "MultiplayerGaming.com".

So I guess it's definitely a win win if you can obtain both.

Thanks!

 

[oldtimer]

My question is, how come they don't make stronger brands than the shorter "brand-able" alternatives. @Gerry used the word memorable, which I really loved, because a lot of my clients want me to come up with that perfect "memorable" brand name, but they also want to own "search" as it relates to EMD's.

In my opinion the best brand-able domains are those that stand out as far as having a unique and memorable element, but that also give a hint as to what Industry they are representing.

So a combination of a generic Industry keyword with a memorable term might be better for smaller companies that don’t have the resources and the clout to turn a coined term (like google ) in to a World famous brand. IMO

PS: I just registered CloudAmericana.com which I believe falls in this category.

-

 

[DTalk]

Sometimes the choice of name & brand is involuntary....A start-up offering daily deals may have wished they owned Coupon.com, but, starting out, they couldn't afford it - so, they went with a make-up phonetic, like, Groupon.com...

...Others like to 'own' their online industry niche with THE generic domain for that niche - but, they have already invested billions over the years on their product brand - its now known - so, they use the generic domain to point to the product brand.


Either way, a relevant domain is a relevant domain - or, its a domain that can be made to be relevant. Travel.com will always be an easier business to build, in the holiday/travel niche, than a business called aaaooo.com....but, its not the only way to build a business.


Its not that there is ever only one way to think about domains, in this context - its that a core skill & responsibility for any business owner/manager is to brand the business/products successfully (memorable & differentiated, and about 20 other things)...

...Its a domainer's core skill to think like those business owners/managers, and help them see the strategic upside of a match with the domains they have on offer.

.