31 replies to this topic

[scolling]

I'm thinking about changing my domain name from bizcomservices.co.uk to bzcm.co.uk, this has been raised as an option as we're relaunching our website with a new look and feel, new messaging and a significant change in the focus of the business and I believe if we were to do this, now would be the best time. Here are my reasons for thinking a change would be good:

• The current website has not been optimised and has no ranking of any significance, certainly for the area of our new focus.
• It’s easier to spell out, i.e. "email me at simon @ B-Z-C-M .co.uk" as opposed to "email me at simon @ bizcomservices, B-I-Z-C-O-M services.co.uk"
• For some reason, to my mind it looks more established
• I perceive a general snobbery about email/website addresses, the shorter the better, and therefore the longer you’ve had it and so the more established you are.
• It fits on literature and into small spaces on paper/brochures etc. more easily.

So, are these reasons valid or completely inconsequential?

Also, if I were to change and set up a 301 redirect on my current domain (which doesn't have any high ranking pages, and certainly not any in my new area of focus) would there be any negative impact for search engines indexing and listing it, and how long should I keep the 301 redirect in place before dropping the old domain?

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Simon

[Jill]

Actually, for me, the longer name is easier to remember. I can easily remember bizcomservices, but bzcm would be impossible for me to ever remember.

I like domains that make sense.

Jill

[SearchRank]

I'm with Jill in that "bizcomservices" is better for branding as it is easier to remember. Ideally "bizcom" would be the best choice but I am sure that is probably already taken by someone else.

[scolling]

Thank you both, Jill and SearchRank, for your throughts.

sadly bizcom went long ago. I did see that biz.com was for sale, but they wanted $950,000 for it, so I didn't pursue that!

[Leann_Pass]

My thoughts are right on with Jill and David here. The longer is MUCH easier to remember. I'd stick with it.

[discountdomains]

Put a permanent re-direct on the old one to your new site.
a 301 - redirect.

That way old customers will still see your site until they are used to the new url.

You have a 3/10 Google page rank based on about 40 links in, I would contact each one and see if they will update these. That way you will retain some of the benefits from your old site.

I personally prefer longer names - but people are all different!


Clare

[scolling]

Thanks for taking time to check that out, Clare

So far it's 100% for no change - I think I'll be sticking with the same domain name.

Thanks everyone
S

[ThreeD]

The longer one is definately the keeper in my opinion...way easier to remember. If I had a choice though, I'd prolly try getting a .com instead of .co.uk Would make it just perfect..

[Jill]

Not really, threeD. If he's got a UK business and wants to show up in the UK search engines, he's much better off with a .co.uk domain name.

[OldWelshGuy]

Agreed, The default domain search in the UK is .co.uk . We look at .coms as being American, not british. Many of the larger companies (& I mean large corporations) have gone down this route, only to find that they are not appearing in the UK only searches, cthus losing business.

If your british, or you are marketing mainly to the UK, then a co.uk is a must IMo. If the co.uk has gone, then forget it as the last thing you want to be doing is driving traffic to a competitiors website.

[Steve Sardell]

Hi Scoilling,
I am with David, Jill, and Leann on this. In name- branding you want something memorable and pronoucable. When going with initials it is better to stick with three than use four. Additionally, when using initials if at all possible you would want a vowel in insertedand preferably first. There are distinct advantages to shorter names which is one of the reasons the shorter domain names were grabbed first, but comparing, in your case, the first name is IMHO a better choice.

[BrianR]

Just to be difficult...

IMO, neither are ideal.

I agree that bzcm.co.uk is a bit hard to remember.

But, as a Brit, I find bizcomservices.co.uk too American-sounding for the local market.

You pays your money and you takes your choice...

BrianR

[Vinnie]

No reason why you cant have them both. We just did the same thing with a site we built.
The site is now mainly .co.uk and if you type in the .com you will go to .co.uk anyhow. The clients email is set up for both.

[eye-2i.com]

I'd slap my money on both of em, but the longer one is easier to remember. i normally hate long domains but in this case it's definitely a winner in comparison to the shorter.

[SteveJ]

bizcomservices.co.uk to bzcm.co.uk

In all honesty I think both names are poor. Where is the differentiation? Bizcomservices could be one of a billion businesses and bzcm is an abbreviation that doesn't mean anything.

Google - is different. I still remember, a friend said, have you heard of that new search engine Google? It was late 1998. I thought, what a bloody ridiculous name for a search engine. But it stuck in my head, it differentiated itself from infoseek which I used at the time. (Can anyone still remember infoseek?) Now only 6 years on Google is the big daddy of the search engine game worth billions, because they had a search engine with differentiating technology which they marketed very well.

The name of a website doesn't have to be the name of your business and I don't get why people do that. What services do you offer? Find a gleam of difference between you and the rest and name yourself something related to that.

To me bizcomservices sounds like any other internet company, e-something, kind of infosomething kind of comany.

Sorry to be controversial and completely disagree with everyone, but I think you should completely go back to the beginning and did the right thing asking for opinions.