What's better .NET or a hyphenated.COM domain
-
What's better .NET or a hyphenated .COM domain
I know this is simple but in selecting a domain for my current project and I only have two options.
firstname-lastname.COM or
firstnamelastname.NETI'm leaning to the .COM as after reading the how to choose a domain name post.
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-choose-the-right-domain-name
Thanks
-
Thanks for the responses, its sounds like the SEO programatic stuff is all about even.
It the human factor that is really up for grabs here, what's easier to read, remember, speak, and trust.
In my case its all about personal brand so a hyphenated .com maybe easier to remember and trust then a non-hyphenated .net which could get confused for a .com
Sounds like i'm still choicing between two good options but not the best option
And yes I'm looking at ronsparks.net vs ron-sparks.com and other future domains with a simliar issue.
ps @EGOL ronskickasssite.com is available tho its a bit hard to read with all those S's
-
I have really strong feelings about hyphen domains and domains other than .com. Most of this is from running retail sites on hyphen domains and trying to explain to people by phone about the hyphen and hearing from them how they went to the wrong domain when trying to visit. The last customers I want going to the wrong domain are the people who are typing it in!
So, after hearing this stuff for a long time I paid hideous sums to get the unhypenated domains and the guys who I bought them from told me that their typein traffic was rising every year.
But, I have those domains now and am happy... well... there is one more that I would like to get.
They say that converts are the worst type of fanatic.
-
EGOL,
While I do not think your response is without merit and I do sometimes consider the issue of which is easier to remember, I am not sure it is as relevant as it was when Rand made that post in 2007. As we see so many sites today with hyphens, I think more people are used to them. But, that does not mean it won't happen.
I think, once someone has seen it visually it is not an issue. If I am doing radio it is. With a non visual medium, you are forced to spell it out and say something like (remember to put in a hyphen between Rons and kickass and Site.net!) That is not a great option.
With most of our sites, people are clicking the link organically for our eCommerce where there are return customers, we are leaving cookies and bookmark options.
As to spending money to get the site you want, it is relative depending on the client. If a client is new (I have a small client who came from a relative that is two ladies who do baby sitting and pet sitting and we are building a 5 to 6 page site for) to business and has a low budget, getting the dream domain is sometimes not possible. Yes, for Fortune 500 they will likely blow a bunch for insuring a branding option.
But, again, it is two sides to a very interesting coin.
Always appreciate your opinions as you think before you write.
Best -
I agree they are equal in SEO, but I also agree you will get differing opinion about looking spammy. i think hythens look spammy, but are coming a bit more normalized as time goes on, but anouther reason is that they are hard to say, image a radio ad, the reader having to explained the hythens
at coca hythen cola dot com
-
I used to have sites with hyphens... and all of my hard work was enriching the guys who owned the domains without a hyphen. The harder I worked to make my site popular the more they enjoyed it. I finally gave in and paid big bucks to get those domains.
So when you are workin hard to make Rons-KickAss-Site.com AND RonsKickAssSite.net huge successes they guy who owns RonsKickAssSite.com will be smiling as lots of your customers land on his spammy site and click ads to sorry domains. Not a good customer experience and not good for your wallet - because the people who remember the name of your site well enough to type it in without a hyphen were probably going to buy something. Nice you just lost that $2000 sale to someone else - and he thinks you went out of business.
So, spend a little more time coming up with a kickass domain or be willing to spend some money to get the domain that you want. Because if you own RonsKickAssSite.com I doubt that anyone is going to look for you at Rons-KickAss-Site.com
Here's a couple of quotes from Rand's post..... at http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-choose-the-right-domain-name
and while directing traffic to a .net or .org (as SEOmoz does) is fine, owning and 301'ing the .com is critical.
Both hyphens and numbers make it hard to give your domain name verbally and falls down on being easy to remember or type.
-
I agree with Robert. The ranking difference between .com / .net and no-hyphen / one-hyphen is going to be minimal. So go for the domain that is easier to read. That will probably benefit you in the long run.
-
My personal opinion is that you can do either, but I would go with the hyphen.com. The reason for me is simple it is easier to read. That said, you will shortly have other opinions and they will revolve around being spammy. There is no increase or decrease in SEO value and I have yet to see any quantification of the spammy factor and any effect on CTR or conversions. But, I don't think the hyphen will out perform the non hyphen.net. I think all things being equal, they will be equal.
Best
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Does Google considers the cached content of a page if it's redirected to new page?
Hi all, If we redirect an old page to some new page, we know that content relevancy between source page and this new page matters at Google. I just wonder if Google is looking at the content relevancy of old page (from cache) and new page too. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
What do you think of SearchMetrics' claim that there are no longer universal ranking factors?
I agree that Google's machine learning/AI means that Google is using a more dynamic set of factors to match searcher intent to content, but this claim feels like an overstatement: Let’s be quite clear: Except for important technical standards, there are no longer any specifc factors
Algorithm Updates | | AdamThompson
or benchmark values that are universally valid for all online marketers and SEOs. Instead, there
are different ranking factors for every single industry, or even every single search query. And these
now change continuously. Keyword-relevant content, backlinks, etc. still seem to be ranking factors across pretty much all queries/industries. For example, I can't think of a single industry where it would be a good idea to try to rank for [keyword] without including [keyword] in the visible text of the page. Also, websites that rank without any backlinks are incredibly rare (unheard of for competitive terms). Doubtless some factors change (eg Google may favor webpages with images for a query like "best hairstyle for men" but not for another query), but other factors still seem to apply to all queries (or at least 95%+). Thoughts?0 -
Google's Presentation Yesterday
We hired a new website/marketing company that is a Preferred Google Partner (one of two in Charlotte according to them) and they hosted a presentation by Google at the Google Fiber office in Charlotte yesterday. As expected, there were lots of self-promotion by Google, accompanied with a plethora of data they created to support their PPC Marketing. It was an impressive performance with Molly Dince and Celena Fergusson, presenting Google Marketing Solutions: "Making the Web Work For You" and the keynote speaker Tim Reis, Director of Performance Agencies at Google: speaking on "Mobile Micromoments: Why Your Biggest Opportunities Are In The Smallest Moments" They ended with 15 minutes of Q&A and my question was answered with "I don't know" which I found surprising. So, here it is Thursday morning and I'm asking the same question to my Moz Family for some feedback: "Since the removal of Ads from the right column of a SERP, what percentage of Google traffic comes from Ads vs. the Organics?" I look forward to your comments. TY,
Algorithm Updates | | KevnJr
KJr0 -
Does it matter? 404 v.s. 302 > Page Not Found
Hey Mozers, What are your thoughts of this situation i'm stuck in all inputs welcome 🙂 I am in the middle of this massive domain migration to a new server. Also we are going to be having a very clean SEO friendly url structure. While I was doing some parsing and cleaning up some old urls I stumbled upon a strange situation on my website. I have a bunch of "dead pages" and they are 302'd to a "page not found" probably a old mistake of one of the past developers. (To clarify the HTTP Status code is not 404) Should I try to fight to get all these "dead pages" a 404 error code or could I just leave the temp redirect 302 > "page not found" ( even though I know for a fact theses pages are not going to turn on again)
Algorithm Updates | | rpaiva0 -
Are companies buying .company domains?
Hi All, Are companies buying .company domains? And does anyone have any thoughts on the future rank-ability of these domains? Kind regards! 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | Avid_Demand0 -
Difference between Google's link: operator and GWT's links to your sites
I haven't used the Google operator link: for a while, and I noticed that there is a big disparity between the operator "link:" and the GWT's links to your site. I compared these results on a number of websites, my own and competitors, and the difference seem to be the same across the board. Has Google made a recent change with how they display link results via the operator? Could this be an indication that they are clean out backlinks?
Algorithm Updates | | tdawson090 -
Old website, new domain name
Hi, We have an old website which is currently being 301'ed to a new domain name / bespoke e commerce website as we're rebranding and having an increase in the range of products we will be selling. My question is can we keep the original e commerce website selling the original products under a new domain name and escape duplicate content issues with the product descriptions as we have copied & pasted product descriptions to the new website ? I'm looking to the future and building another domain name will help with future expansion plans / thoughts. Both websites are registered to us at the same business address if this helps. Please feel free to ask questions if I haven't worded this very well! Many thanks in advance.
Algorithm Updates | | OliverBainbridge0 -
Hyphens vs Underscores
I am optimizing a site which uses underscores rather than hyphens as word separators (such_as_this.php vs. such-as-this.php). Most of these pages have been around since 2007, and I am hesitant to just redirect to a new page because I am worried it will cause the rankings to slip. Would you recommend changing the file names to be in hyphenated format and place 301 redirects on the pages with underscores, or stick with the existing pages? Is there anything else that would work better? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | BluespaceCreative1